The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-20-2013, 11:26 PM   #1
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,271

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default How Rand Paul will create a new generation of Black Republicans

PAUL: The devastating collateral damage of an insidious drug-war weapon

By Rand Paul Friday,
September 20, 2013

If I told you that in America almost 1 million black Americans were forever forbidden from voting, you might think I was talking about Jim Crow 50 years ago, but you would be wrong. According to the Sentencing Project, a staggering number of nonviolent individuals who have been released from prison, are not on probation or parole and who have committed no further crimes, are forever prohibited from voting.

Many black Americans are prevented from ever voting because of the war on drugs.

On Wednesday, I testified before the SenateJudiciary Committee and described the injustice and effects of mandatory-minimum sentences.
These sentences are disproportionally affecting minorities and low-income communities. A recent report from the American Civil Liberties Union reports that blacks are four to five times more likely to be convicted for drug possession. Some dismiss this because they think blacks are committing more drug crimes, but in June, The New York Times reported that although black Americans were four times more likely to be arrested than whites for marijuana possession, both groups used the drug at similar rates.

Why are the arrest rates so lopsided? One widely cited study by The San Jose Mercury News reviewed 700,000 criminal cases that were matched by crime and criminal history of the defendant. The analysis revealed that similarly situated whites were far more successful than blacks and Hispanics in the plea-bargaining process.

Today, the United States incarcerates more people than any other country in the world, and the racial disparity in arrest rates has been absolutely devastating to the black community. Professor Michelle Alexander has even called the war on drugs “the New Jim Crow.”

It’s not just black Americans. Regardless of the color of your skin, the war on drugs has ruined the lives of thousands of young people.

I know a man about my age in Kentucky who grew marijuana plants in his apartment closet in college. Thirty years later, he still can’t vote, can’t own a gun, and when he looks for work, he must check the box that basically says: “I’m a convicted felon, and I guess I’ll always be one.” Getting a job is nearly impossible for him.

John Horner was a 46-year-old father of three when he sold some of his prescription painkillers to a friend. His friend turned out to be a police informant, and he was charged with dealing drugs. Horner pleaded guilty and was later sentenced to the mandatory minimum of 25 years in prison.

John will be 72 years old by the time he is released, and his three young children will have grown up without him. The informant, who had a long history of drug offenses, was more fortunate — he received a reduced sentence of just 18 months, and is now free.

So many judges oppose mandatory-minimum sentencing precisely because such an arbitrary law does not take into account that each case is different.
I want to be clear: I am not advocating for any type of get-out-of-jail-free passes for individuals who break the law. I am simply arguing that the federal government should get out of the way, and allow local and state judges to do their jobs.

Mandatory-minimum sentences automatically impose a minimum number of years in prison for specific crimes — usually related to drugs. By design, mandatory-sentencing laws take discretion away from prosecutors and judges so as to impose harsh sentences, regardless of circumstances.

Since mandatory sentencing began in the 1970s in response to a growing drug-and-crime epidemic, America’s prison population has quadrupled, to 2.4 million. America now jails a higher percentage of its citizens than any other country, including China and Iran, at the staggering cost of $80 billion a year. Drug offenders in the United States spend more time under the criminal justice system’s formal control than drug offenders anywhere else in the world.

Most public officials — liberals, conservatives and libertarians — have decided that mandatory-minimum sentencing is unnecessary. At least 20 states, both red and blue, have reformed their mandatory-sentencing laws in some way, and Congress is considering a bipartisan bill that would do the same for federal crimes.

About 1.3 million people — more than half the total prison population — are behind bars for nonviolent crimes, and federal prisons are 40 percent over capacity. “It’s a waste of tax dollars and human lives,” said Anthony Papa of the Drug Policy Alliance.

It’s time for these unjust laws to end.

On March 20, I introduced the Justice Safety Valve Act of 2013 with the Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat. We have been joined by Sens. Carl Levin, Michigan Democrat; Angus King, Maine independent; and Kristen Gillibrand, New York Democrat, in the Senate, and Rep. Robert C. “Bobby” Scott, Virginia Democrat, joined by 11 others, introduced similar legislation in the House. The legislation is short and simple. It amends current law to provide “authority to impose a sentence below a statutory mandatory minimum” if certain requirements are met.

Mandatory-minimum sentencing has done little to address the very real problem of drug abuse, while also doing great damage by destroying so many lives. Each case should be judged on its own merits, yet mandatory minimums prevent this from happening. The Justice Safety Valve Act will be an important step in improving justice in our nation’s courtrooms.

Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican, is a member of the Senate Foreign Relations and Homeland Security committees.


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...#ixzz2fVQQDKo8
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 09-21-2013, 08:24 AM   #2
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,411
Default

How come Paul is the only GOPer that wants to do this?

It will take a lot more than this one bill to get blacks to consider Republicans. The GOP must purge many members and radically alter its ideology to get support from blacks. It will have to become a different party.

Besides, why is a libertarian plumping for a Republican? Becoming a LINO, TJ?
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 10:24 AM   #3
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by W*GS View Post
How come Paul is the only GOPer that wants to do this?

It will take a lot more than this one bill to get blacks to consider Republicans. The GOP must purge many members and radically alter its ideology to get support from blacks. It will have to become a different party.

Besides, why is a libertarian plumping for a Republican? Becoming a LINO, TJ?
They can start with canceling every one of their Voter ID initiatives. That would go a long way.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 11:25 AM   #4
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,271

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
They can start with canceling every one of their Voter ID initiatives. That would go a long way.
A long way towards what? Voter ID initiatives poll very well across the board.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 11:39 AM   #5
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 52,933

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

I'm still trying to find the place in the Constitution where it says the government can tell citizens what they can and cannot ingest, and then throw them in prison and seize their property and assets if they don't obey.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 11:46 AM   #6
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
A long way towards what? Voter ID initiatives poll very well across the board.
Okay, let's be more specific here.

We're talking about Voter ID.

We're also talking about eliminating early voting.

We're also talking about eliminating same-day registration.

We're also talking about reducing the number of polling places.

You can't seriously think that these initiatives didn't contribute to the Republican epic fail in every demographic except white males, can you? Or are you another one of those like Reverend who believe that black people just voted for Obama because he's black?

If that's the case, God help you and your party...you're the reason why they'll never win another national election.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 11:52 AM   #7
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Analysis: 201,000 in Florida didn't vote because of long lines

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...te-ken-detzner

No One in America Should Have to Wait 7 Hours to Vote

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...o-vote/264506/

Quote:
Representative John Becker (R-Union Township) introduced House Bill 250, which would cut early voting days from 35 to 17 and also would stop early voting on the weekends and Mondays before a Tuesday election.
http://crawfordcountynow.com/local/e...ng-that-works/

But yeah...voter suppression is the way to win over the hearts and minds of the minorities. Good luck with that.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 12:14 PM   #8
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,704

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
A long way towards what? Voter ID initiatives poll very well across the board.
The only reason they poll well is because the propaganda has convinced people that there is a serious problem of voter fraud (which is absolutely, laughably not true) and that the target of these initiatives is illegals and other non-citizens (which is also absolutely not true).

There's also a serious contingent of folks that know what the initiatives are actually targeting (the poor, minorities, etc.) and support those initiatives because of it.
Fedaykin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 12:35 PM   #9
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
The only reason they poll well is because the propaganda has convinced people that there is a serious problem of voter fraud (which is absolutely, laughably not true) and that the target of these initiatives is illegals and other non-citizens (which is also absolutely not true).

There's also a serious contingent of folks that know what the initiatives are actually targeting (the poor, minorities, etc.) and support those initiatives because of it.
And there's also a serious contingent of folks that know what the initiatives are actually targeting (the poor, minorities, etc.) and refuse to support anyone who is in favor of them.

As long as the right is going to keep with the mantra that voter fraud is a big problem, that these initiatives are needed, and...oh! What a coincidence! The people most adversely affected by this are people just happen to be a demographic that generally doesn't vote Republican!...they will continue to lose and lose big with minorities.

Just like their obsession with abortion and birth control...and women's private parts in general.

The funny thing is, despite the attempt...they STILL lost Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and North Carolina. How they think it will be any better next time around is hilarious. It will only get worse.

Just wait until Texas comes into play the election cycle after next.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 01:26 PM   #10
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,271

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
Okay, let's be more specific here.

We're talking about Voter ID.

We're also talking about eliminating early voting.

We're also talking about eliminating same-day registration.

We're also talking about reducing the number of polling places.

You can't seriously think that these initiatives didn't contribute to the Republican epic fail in every demographic except white males, can you? Or are you another one of those like Reverend who believe that black people just voted for Obama because he's black?

If that's the case, God help you and your party...you're the reason why they'll never win another national election.

I don't really have a party. In fact, there isn't a single presidential vote I've ever cast for a Republican. So party affiliation means nothing to me in this discussion.

As far as this issue goes, I think that voter ID laws are just the reality of having a welfare state. I don't like ID laws any more than anyone else, but they're a symptom of the system, not a means unto themselves.

They're not something that I personally advocate for. I just see them as an eventual next step. And it's hard to understand why everything else in our system should require ID but voting not. That doesn't make any sense to me.

If the argument against that is that it makes it harder to vote - I think that's a very good argument, and I wish you'd apply that logic to everything else that government gets involved in and makes harder to do.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 01:31 PM   #11
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,620

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
I don't really have a party. In fact, there isn't a single presidential vote I've ever cast for a Republican. So party affiliation means nothing to me in this discussion.

As far as this issue goes, I think that voter ID laws are just the reality of having a welfare state. I don't like ID laws any more than anyone else, but they're a symptom of the system, not a means unto themselves.

They're not something that I personally advocate for. I just see them as an eventual next step. And it's hard to understand why everything else in our system should require ID but voting not. That doesn't make any sense to me
.

If the argument against that is that it makes it harder to vote - I think that's a very good argument, and I wish you'd apply that logic to everything else that government gets involved in and makes harder to do.
that's the entire point these "voter id laws" aren't about voter IDs it about limiting the minority vote. Voter ID is the bogus sales pitch being used to sell the idea of limiting minority voters. it's a trojan horse.
peacepipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 01:56 PM   #12
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,271

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

If you guys say so. I mean, it's not racist to ask people to get IDs to drive, so I'm not sure why you'd think it would be racist to ask people to show ID to vote. If showing ID is inherently racist, then we need to do away with this wicked infrastructure, right?

Like I say, I don't advocate for it. It just seems like natural governmental creep.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 01:57 PM   #13
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
I don't really have a party. In fact, there isn't a single presidential vote I've ever cast for a Republican. So party affiliation means nothing to me in this discussion.

As far as this issue goes, I think that voter ID laws are just the reality of having a welfare state. I don't like ID laws any more than anyone else, but they're a symptom of the system, not a means unto themselves.

They're not something that I personally advocate for. I just see them as an eventual next step. And it's hard to understand why everything else in our system should require ID but voting not. That doesn't make any sense to me.

If the argument against that is that it makes it harder to vote - I think that's a very good argument, and I wish you'd apply that logic to everything else that government gets involved in and makes harder to do.
It's not just that it makes it harder to vote...it makes it in effect a poll tax, it unfairly and disproportionately targets a minority segment of the population, and it's done subversively.

I'm on record saying I have no problem with Voter ID laws, as long as they are done responsibly, in plenty of time for the election, and at no cost to the voter.

But they are not. In the last election, the laws were pushed through in the 11th hour, with those supporting the measures knowing that there wouldn't be enough time for those affected to get the IDs in time to vote.

If you were paying attention, a legislator went on record before the election saying the Voter ID laws in PA were going to give Romney the election. A separate legislator confirmed they gained 5 points after the election because of them. That says it all right there.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 02:02 PM   #14
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
If you guys say so. I mean, it's not racist to ask people to get IDs to drive, so I'm not sure why you'd think it would be racist to ask people to show ID to vote. If showing ID is inherently racist, then we need to do away with this wicked infrastructure, right?

Like I say, I don't advocate for it. It just seems like natural governmental creep.
Which one of these is a privilege?

[ ] Driving a car

[ ] Voting

Which one of these is a right?

[ ] Driving a car

[ ] Voting
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 02:04 PM   #15
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,704

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
If you guys say so. I mean, it's not racist to ask people to get IDs to drive, so I'm not sure why you'd think it would be racist to ask people to show ID to vote. If showing ID is inherently racist, then we need to do away with this wicked infrastructure, right?

Like I say, I don't advocate for it. It just seems like natural governmental creep.
You miss the point. It's not about "racism" other than the fact that it so happens that minorities (and poor people, including poor whites) tend to vote against the interests of the people that are pushing for the voter id laws.

Voter ID laws are about voter suppression.

Also, driving is a privilege that a person is required to demonstrate competency at by being licensed. It's not a "right".
Fedaykin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 02:07 PM   #16
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,704

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
If the argument against that is that it makes it harder to vote - I think that's a very good argument, and I wish you'd apply that logic to everything else that government gets involved in and makes harder to do.
The problem isn't that I disagree with yourdiagnoses. It's that I disagree with your treatment. In the past you've advocated for the abolishment is nearly all regulation. That won't solve a damn thing.

The purpose of government is to make things harder. Particularly those things that allow one person or group to injure another. Often the group doing the injuring is the government, but that does not mean no government is the answer.
Fedaykin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 03:10 PM   #17
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,271

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
It's not just that it makes it harder to vote...it makes it in effect a poll tax, it unfairly and disproportionately targets a minority segment of the population, and it's done subversively.
I don't agree with either of these points. I understand why you're demagoguing like this though. That's politics. But no, it's not a poll tax, and no, it's not trying to racistly oppress minorities. Minorities aren't oppressed by needing drivers licenses, I don't see where it should be seen as racism to require ID at the polling station.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 03:15 PM   #18
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 52,933

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
I don't agree with either of these points. I understand why you're demagoguing like this though. That's politics. But no, it's not a poll tax, and no, it's not trying to racistly oppress minorities. Minorities aren't oppressed by needing drivers licenses, I don't see where it should be seen as racism to require ID at the polling station.
What ill does it cure? Why take the action? Is voting fraud rampant? Why now? What is the sudden need for such legislation? IMO, it's a treatment for a disease that doesn't exist. And if that's the case, is there an ulterior motive here, like suppressing the black vote, for instance?
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 03:18 PM   #19
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
I don't agree with either of these points. I understand why you're demagoguing like this though. That's politics. But no, it's not a poll tax, and no, it's not trying to racistly oppress minorities. Minorities aren't oppressed by needing drivers licenses, I don't see where it should be seen as racism to require ID at the polling station.
Because driving isn't a right, it's a privilege. Voting is a right, not a privilege. You do realize that in order to get a Voter ID in many of these states, you needed a copy of your birth certificate...which many blacks were not issued prior to 1964?

Don't understand how hard that is for you to comprehend.

How much does it cost to get a Voter ID?

These facts were all argued on this board before the election. I'm not going to go through them again with you...I'll just point you to the several discussions and you can educate yourself.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 03:18 PM   #20
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,704

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
I don't agree with either of these points. I understand why you're demagoguing like this though. That's politics. But no, it's not a poll tax, and no, it's not trying to racistly oppress minorities. Minorities aren't oppressed by needing drivers licenses, I don't see where it should be seen as racism to require ID at the polling station.
What is the motive for voter id laws? You seem to be arguing that it's not about voter suppression. Are you arguing that?
Fedaykin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 03:18 PM   #21
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,271

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
The problem isn't that I disagree with yourdiagnoses. It's that I disagree with your treatment. In the past you've advocated for the abolishment is nearly all regulation. That won't solve a damn thing.
I've never advocated for the abolishment of nearly all regulation. I'm a strong believer in appropriate regulation, especially favoring market regulations. You happen to think that government regulations are the best kind, and I think reality has proven otherwise. Government has a role, but when they go out of their bounds, it's usually to give some business or another an unfair competitive advantage against others.

Quote:
The purpose of government is to make things harder.
Poor people everywhere know this to be the case. Government has made things a lot harder on everyone, and this is the economy we have to show for it.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 03:31 PM   #23
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,271

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
What is the motive for voter id laws? You seem to be arguing that it's not about voter suppression. Are you arguing that?
What is the purpose of any ID law?

Why do I have to show my ID to travel? Why do I have to show my ID to buy beer? Why do I have to show my ID to purchase a pack of cigarettes? Why do I have to show my ID to drive a car?

ID laws are put in place to make certain that people who are doing the things they are doing have the credentials to do those things.

Like I said, I'm not advocating ID laws. But if we're going to have this big, expansive nanny state, identification documents end up being part and parcel with the program.

Now I understand you want to make this about race. That's your prerogative. Everyone has their go-to demagogue cards to play, even me. I'm just not going to really engage in that part of the discussion because I don't find it to be valuable and it doesn't really interest me.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 03:32 PM   #24
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,704

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
I've never advocated for the abolishment of nearly all regulation. I'm a strong believer in appropriate regulation, especially favoring market regulations.
LMAO Total Bull****:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John
http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpos...&postcount=118

I'm a fan of the Rockwell 30 day plan to a brighter future...

DAY ONE: The federal income tax is abolished and April 15th is declared a national holiday. The 40% reduction in federal revenues is matched by a 40% cut in spending. The budget is still almost twice as big as Jimmy Carter's.

DAY TWO: All other federal taxes are abolished, including the corporate income tax, the capital gains tax, the gasoline tax, "sin" taxes, excise taxes, etc. Businesses boom, and the few legitimate federal functions are funded with an inexpensive head tax. People who choose not to vote need not pay it. (Note: this was a mainstream view in the 19th century.)

DAY THREE: The federal government sells all its land, freeing up tens of millions of acres for development, mining, farming, forestry, oil drilling, private parks, etc. The government uses the revenue to pay off the national debt and other liabilities.

DAY FOUR: The minimum wage is reduced to zero, creating jobs for ex-federal bureaucrats at their market wage. All pro-union laws and regulations are scrapped. The jobless rate falls dramatically.

DAY FIVE: The Bureau of Labor Statistics, like the rest of the Labor Department, is sent to that big hiring hall in the sky. Without detailed economic statistics, future economic planners will be blind and deaf.

DAY SIX: The Department of Commerce is abolished. Big business has to make its own way in the world, without subsidies and privileges at the expense of its competitors and customers.

DAY SEVEN: The plug is pulled on the Department of Energy. Oil and gas prices plummet.

DAY EIGHT: All regulatory agencies, from the Interstate Commerce Commission to the Federal Trade Commission, are deep-sixed. Competition is legalized.

DAY NINE: HUD is squashed like a bug. There's a building boom in cheap, private, apartments.

DAY TEN: The interstate highways reopen as private businesses. Road entrepreneurs price travel according to consumer demand. Using modern technology, drivers get bills once a month. Credit risks – and drunks and dangerous drivers – aren't allowed on the road. Non-drivers no longer subsidize car owners.

DAY ELEVEN: Government welfare is wiped out. Bums work or starve. The deserving poor find a cornucopia of private services designed to make them independent. Private charity explodes, as the American people, already the most generous in the world, find their incomes almost doubled, thanks to the tax cuts.

DAY TWELVE: The Federal Reserve closes its open-market operations and stops protecting the banking industry from competition. But banks can now engage in all the non-bank financial activities previously forbidden to them. The business cycle, which is caused by monetary expansion through the credit markets, is liquidated.

DAY THIRTEEN: Federal deposit insurance is scrapped. All insured deposits are redeemed from federal assets, which include the personal assets of high-level government employees. The threat of bank runs forces banks to keep 100% reserves for their demand deposits, and prudent reserves on all other accounts. There are no more inherently bankrupt banks propped up by the government, at taxpayer expense, and no more bail-outs.

DAY FOURTEEN: The shaky fiat dollar is defined in terms of gold, with the ratio determined by dividing the government's gold stock by all existing dollars on that day.

DAY FIFTEEN: The federal government sells National and Dulles airports to the highest bidder, and stops all subsidies to other socialist airports around the country. All constraints on airline prices and service cease. It costs more to fly during peak hours than off-peak, but overall, air travel drops in price.

DAY SIXTEEN: All government regulations that create and sustain cartels are abolished, including those for the post office, telephones, television, radio, and cable TV. Prices plummet, and a host of new and unforeseen services becomes available.

DAY SEVENTEEN: Centrally planned agriculture, as imposed by Hoover and Roosevelt, is repealed: there are no more subsidies, payments-in-kind, marketing orders, low-interest loans, etc. Farm prices drop. Entrepreneurial farmers get rich. Welfare farmers go into another line of work. The poor eat like kings.

DAY EIGHTEEN: The Justice Department shutters its anti-trust division. Companies, big and small, are free to merge – up, down, or sideways. Stockholders can buy any other company, or sell their stock to anyone else. Marginal producers can no longer battle their competitors with bureaucratic weapons.

DAY NINETEEN: The Department of Education flunks the constitutionality test, and is kicked out. Private charities set up remedial reading and writing programs for the former bureaucrats. Federally subsidized sex education and other anti-family programs go out of business. Local school districts become responsive to parents or close, pressured by a fast-growing private school sector (which many more parents can now afford).

DAY TWENTY: All federal monuments are sold, in some cases to non-profit groups based on the Mt. Vernon Ladies Association, which owns and runs George Washington's home. The VFW buys the Vietnam memorial. There is much bidding for the Jefferson and Washington monuments. Nobody wants FDR's, so it's torn down and the land sold to a farmer. (With the federal government cut back to its constitutional size, much of Washington reverts to productive uses like agriculture, as in late 18th century.)

DAY TWENTY-ONE: The computerized financial and political dossier maintained by the government on every American is erased. The public wanders through the federal offices to make sure, in a reprise of the East Berliners' visits to Stasi headquarters.

DAY TWENTY-TWO: Equal rights are granted to all Americans, even members of non-victim groups. There is no affirmative action, no quotas, no set-asides, no public accommodations laws. Private property and freedom of association are fully restored.

DAY TWENTY-THREE: The EPA is cleaned out, with all "clean air" and similar big-government laws repealed. Ten thousand lawyers leap from their balconies. Private property is established in air and water. Americans harmed by pollution are free to sue the polluters, who are no longer protected by the federal government.

DAY TWENTY-FOUR: Americans are given complete freedom of contract, restoring rationality to malpractice and product liability law.

DAY TWENTY-FIVE: Government scrambles for more assets to sell (i.e., the National Zoo, also known as Washington, D.C.) to pay off the liabilities of the privatized Social Security system.

DAY TWENTY-SIX: Porno artists have to earn their own livings, as the National Endowment for the Arts tries to raise its budget through sidewalk painting sales.

DAY TWENTY-SEVEN: Foreign aid is outlawed as unconstitutional, unjust, and un-economic. Foreign politicians have to steal their own money. The World Bank, IMF, and United Nations close their super-luxurious doors.

DAY TWENTY-EIGHT: The American people are given the unrestricted right to keep and bear arms.

DAY TWENTY-NINE: The Defense Department is reoriented towards defense. American troops come home from all around the world. We adopt a policy of armed neutrality, remembering the Founding Fathers' teaching that we could not have an empire abroad and a constitutional republic at home.

DAY THIRTY: All tariffs, quotas, and trade agreements are put through the shredder. Americans can trade with anyone in the world, without barriers or subsidies. Japanese car prices drop an immediate 25%.


Quote:
You happen to think that government regulations are the best kind, and I think reality has proven otherwise. Government has a role, but when they go out of their bounds, it's usually to give some business or another an unfair competitive advantage against others.
Where has laissez-faire capitalism worked? It's just as flawed a policy as communism.

Quote:
Poor people everywhere know this to be the case. Government has made things a lot harder on everyone, and this is the economy we have to show for it.
The people making it harder on everyone are the corporations who have subverted government for their own purposes.

"Market Regulation" is nothing but code for "he who has the most money, wins".
Fedaykin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2013, 03:38 PM   #25
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,704

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
What is the purpose of any ID law?

Why do I have to show my ID to travel? Why do I have to show my ID to buy beer? Why do I have to show my ID to purchase a pack of cigarettes? Why do I have to show my ID to drive a car?

ID laws are put in place to make certain that people who are doing the things they are doing have the credentials to do those things.
ID laws are put in place to stop problem. Drug use by children. Incompetent drivers. Terrorists boarding planes.

What problem is being addressed by voter id laws?


Quote:
Now I understand you want to make this about race. That's your prerogative. Everyone has their go-to demagogue cards to play, even me. I'm just not going to really engage in that part of the discussion because I don't find it to be valuable and it doesn't really interest me.
Nice attempt at trying to deflect our conversation. I've already said it's not about race, but about suppressing the votes of people that don't agree with certain factions.
Fedaykin is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:54 AM.


Denver Broncos