Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

The Modern Day Miracle of Israel

Dot462 Wrote: Dec 28, 2014 1:59 PM
There's been envy and jealousy of Jews for several thousand years. Jews bought land from the Ottomans and turned it into farms and productive businesses. The area that had been occupied by the Ottomans was a desert that nobody was using. Jews made it bloom and were rewarded by hate and resentment from those who had done nothing with it. Jews in Europe were vilified for hundreds of years for being moneylenders, but Christianity did not allow the lending of money for interest. Jews were killed during the Inquisition for refusing to renounce their religion. Now, we have arab countries which put war refugees into camps, refusing to allow them to move into their cities, telling them how they would be able to go back into Israel when the Jews were driven into the sea. Now, the Jews haven't been driven into the sea but the arab countries still hate them at least in part because of Israel's achievements, and they also hate them because of their military power. There can't be peace in that area because of the long-term hate. Sure, there have been excesses on the Israeli side. Everybody provoking everybody, escalation of terrorism and violence. It's too bad.
Look at all the revenue police depts get from asset forfeiture. People don't even have to be convicted of a crime in order to have their property confiscated. Somebody carrying what the police think is "too much money in cash" have it confiscated and have a helluva time getting it back. Parents who had a grown son who brought illegal drugs into the house (they say they didn't know) had their house confiscated when the son was caught. What's the point of putting people out on the street? A motel owner had the motel confiscated for tenants engaging in illegal activities. It's an incentive for police to find some violation in order to get the property and make the money. Lots of cars are confiscated if drugs are found therein. Asset forfeiture should not be allowed unless there's a conviction.
In response to:

The Social Security Collection Agency

Dot462 Wrote: Dec 28, 2014 12:23 PM
It's tough to fight a huge govt agency. The bigger they get the tougher it is. A good reason for trying to keep the govt as small as possible. There's a lot of abuse of citizens by govt agencies, such as eminent domain abuse, asset forfeiture without conviction... Support the Institute for Justice which helps individuals and businesses fight such things.
The unfortunate part of the Nevada ban on Uber is that the entrenched taxi companies control the regulatory agency and are not going to allow competition even though many people complain about current taxi service in Las Vegas. Nevada is a tourist mecca at Vegas (in particular) and tourists claim they have to ride in cabs that are not clean, that sometimes drivers go the long way around, the rates are fixed at a high rate by the authority. Seems to me like the regulatory authority is engaging in restraint of trade. Apparently, with Uber no longer in Nevada that over 1000 jobs for self-employed Uber drivers disappeared overnight. There's no guarantee that taxis working for established companies are safer or cleaner or driven by good drivers any more than Uber. Uber drivers carry insurance, and it's in their interest to maintain their cars.
In response to:

Deflation or Bust?

Dot462 Wrote: Dec 03, 2014 1:16 PM
But, we know that inflation benefits debtors and punishes creditors. In the 1923 German runaway inflation, creditors were wiped out due to the destruction of the currency while debtors got away with never repaying. Since 1970, the dollar has lost more than 100% of its value so people are indeed paying their mortgages with cheaper dollars. True, aggregate wage estimates indicate that raises haven't kept up with inflation, but that's not true of all people in all places. Some people are making a lot more money while others are unemployed. Some people get foreclosed on, but in the main that was caused by bad decisions about when to buy real estate and/or inability to pay the mortgage due to lax mortgage-writing standards. Inflation allows the biggest debtors to service their debt with cheaper dollars and who's the biggest debtor of all? It's in the interest of the Feds to keep inflation going (it's only about 3% a year right now), plus the low interest rates. The Fed's problem is going to be if the billions of dollars sitting around overseas ever comes back to the U.S. Billions of more dollars would definitely devalue the currency and the Fed wouldn't have control of it.
In response to:

Place Your Bets

Dot462 Wrote: Dec 03, 2014 1:01 PM
Nevada has legal sports books (in casinos) with myriad types of bets. But, Nevada zealously protects its unique status (after all, Harry Reid was in charge in the Senate), just as the taxi companies have banded against Uber here in Nevada, and big casinos have worked to ruin Dotty's (a chain of small neighborhood casinos that people really like). As you know, John, entrenched interests work to make sure that the govt makes regulations and laws against their competition. It's kind of like a law of human nature. I don't see why people can't bet on anything they want -- and, of course, they do privately.
In response to:

It Takes A Village To Raise A Looter

Dot462 Wrote: Dec 02, 2014 2:43 PM
Can't find the citation right now, but a couple weeks ago Van Jones lined up on the Marxist line just as Prof. Adams here outlined. Abolition of private property (if you can't take it over, then burn it), take what the bourgeois have amassed (loot and steal), call all police oppressors and thugs (violent revolution against all authority) -- and along the way are some people who just enjoy destruction for the sake of destruction, There might also be some murderers among those who like to destroy, such as the teenage crew who grabbed the Bosnian man near St. Louis and beat him to death with hammers. Destruction and rioting encourages such murderers. Rioting has to be stopped as soon as it starts. There must be overwhelming force used and rioters must not be labeled as "protesters" by the media. They are thieves and destroyers and if they are allowed to steal and burn with impunity they will destroy this country. But, maybe that's what people such as Van Jones want -- apparently Marxism isn't dead.
In response to:

Opinions Versus Facts

Dot462 Wrote: Dec 02, 2014 2:24 PM
And what about the idiots in the Guy Fawkes masks who claim they're "anonymous?" How about those outside agitators who came in there fomenting violence and theft maybe just because they prefer to destroy and get joy out of it? The outside agitators don't have to live in the city they destroy after they destroy it; they go elsewhere. But, the victims of destruction (unless they're able to leave) have to stay there and try to make a go of it. There are some really bad people out there who seem to believe that private property is something to take and destroy, that all governmental authority should be resisted, that violent revolution is the way to go. Some of these people are murderers who get a kick out of seeing a fire, throwing rocks and bottles or shooting at police and firefighters. Some of them are mindless thugs like the teenage group who killed the Bosnian man near St. Louis with hammers. Those who actually want to "protest" something have to recognize when their cause is being manipulated and infiltrated by murderers.
If you want to do some good, donate to the Institute for Justice. They defend property owners against eminent domain abuse. They fight against abusive licensing requirements that restrain entry of individuals and businesses into certain types of operation. They stand up for the individual against the power of the state.
If you want to do some good, donate to the Institute for Justice. They defend property owners against eminent domain abuse. They fight against abusive licensing requirements that restrain entry of individuals and businesses into certain types of operation. They stand up for the individual against the power of the state.
Kelo vs. New London might be the worst abuse of property rights that has been decided by the Supremes. But, that's partly what happens when there's a public authority involved. The concept of the public authority was developed by Robert Moses in New York who condemned property with a will for what he considered a "public purpose." This case here is just another example of abuse of the property owner.
Previous 11 - 20 Next