Floyd protests ignore the real issue of statism

Op-Ed: Virtue Signaling and Fundraising Solve Nothing | Loudwire - Eric July:

“For example, when a cop shoots a black man you focus on the racism… ignoring all the statism / Holding signs, rioting is not about to save him ‘cause you must’ve forgot that that’s the power that you gave them”
                                  – “Self Ownership” by BackWordz in 2016. Words by: Eric July.

June 8, 2020 - "Imagine spending the last five years building a band from the ground up and releasing the first album right in the middle of an election cycle ... that has the theme of addressing the political and social landscape while being in opposition to a criminal institution known as the State.... Because the band’s philosophy threatens the institution that is used to fund or enforce the general politics and ideals of people within the scene, the scene defends the State against the band and its members....

"And ... a man that is the same color as the frontman is slowly killed by the same institution you spoke against. But the same people that were defending the State and supported people that wanted to expand its reach, are now concerned with the 'injustices' faced by people that are of the same race of the frontman....

"This conversation went straight to white vs. black or blue vs. black when it should be the State vs. You. At this point, I don’t even care to have these discussions about whether or not the law enforcement disproportionately kills when you account for population, crime rates etc. This issue is not going to be resolved if we can get everybody to be killed at the same rate.... But the national narrative is centered around racism and that alone, so now we have many different people trying to prove that they’re one of the good guys pertaining to how they view black people....

"Putting it bluntly: This is just a show for the most part and none of these actions are actually conducive to resolving the issue of State aggression.... For purposes of this write-up, understand that the State is a territorial monopoly on use of force, violence and ultimate decision making. The law enforcement, from the local level up to the federal level, are the teeth of the State. It’s not going to be Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders, or your local representative that enforces the laws; it’s the law enforcers. Because this monopoly exists, they do not play by the same rules as the other people.

"Look no further than George Floyd to see this play out. Three men, with one on his neck, slowly killed him as onlookers pleaded with the cops. They didn’t step in to physically stop the cop. They just pleaded.... So why didn’t the onlookers assist George Floyd and opt to record it instead?... They could be shot. They could face charges in assaulting a police officer ... and ending up also dead or in prison isn’t worth it. Once they see the uniform and the badge, they understand that the State agents are rewarded with a set of protection that simply isn’t offered to the rest of the citizens....

"The cultural issue that nobody wants to really discuss is how people look to the State and their law enforcers as Gods even if they claim to hate them. Just a week ago some of the same people that were marching were lecturing people about how the State must impose a lockdown on the entire country because they were scared of a virus. They had no problem snitching on their neighbors and this economic illiteracy put 40 million or so people out of work, stripping them of their livelihoods much like what happens when businesses are destroyed.

"Who enforced these lockdowns? The same cops that they’re calling bastards. Because the game is rigged, they were able to go-back on everything that they previously lectured us about.... This isn’t unlike the other contradictory positions they have. Many of them support big government welfare statists and advocate for 'free' things such as college and healthcare. All of this is funded by theft and coercion of property through taxation. In the event any individual does not want to pay for said welfare statism who is going to confiscate property forcefully? Local and/or federal law enforcers.... If you advocate for things such as welfare statism or further taxation to pay for the things, what you advocate implies usage of cops in some capacity....

"I’m all for community-based security and privatized, voluntary forms of protection. I do not want something that is only defunded in name or replaced with State law enforcement under a different moniker. But ultimately we are our own first responders. Gun ownership is something that I feel as now necessary more than ever and people, especially black people, are looking to get armed. This has been my recent focus in activism in getting my family and friends trained on how to use guns....

"We can discuss the racist history of gun control in America, but I’d rather focus on the now. These are truly enemies of people and a large part of why I’d never be caught marching alongside these types. Prior to a week ago they wanted me dead, disarmed, taxed to death or ruled over. They are enemies of liberty, and I see these types as merely a rival gang of the cops. Neither are my friends, and I’m not forced to choose a side. In fact, the latter is statistically more likely to kill me than the cops. But every man and woman has the right to defend themselves against all aggressors, including state agents."

Read more: https://loudwire.com/op-ed-eric-july-virtue-signaling-fundraising-solve-nothing/

Now Tyler Cowan takes a run at libertarianism

Not Losing Sight of the Classical Liberal Ideal – Richard M. Ebeling (01/07/2020) – WallStreetWindow.com:

January 7, 2020 - "Today, the media and ... public policy publications are awash in articles and essays insisting that the postwar 'neoliberal' era has finally and inescapably come to an end.... Most of these criticisms and challenges have come from 'progressives,' the new 'democratic' socialists, and a growing number in the Democratic Party.... But criticisms and rejection of domestic and international liberalism have also come from conservatives, who have called for a 'new nationalism,' that would require a more “activist” state to serve national interests and identity....

"Now another voice has offered his view on whether or not classical liberalism and libertarianism can survive in their historical forms of defending individual liberty, free markets, and a government primarily limited to the protecting of people’s individual rights to life, liberty and honestly acquired property without interventionist regulation and compulsory redistribution. And his answer, too, is, 'No.'

"Tyler Cowen is a prominent professor of economics at George Mason University in Virginia. He has written a number of insightful books devoted to aspects of the economics and culture of a free society, and has written regular columns for both The New York Times and Bloomberg News. He also co-authors the provocative and widely read blogsite, 'Marginal Revolution'....

"The gist of his argument is that classical liberalism and libertarianism are out-of-date and passé political philosophies that had their relevance and significance in the 19th century for advancing the cause of personal liberty and freer markets, and during the first half of the 20th century as an argument against radical socialist central planning. But society and its problems have moved on and what people want from their government has become more expansive....  That’s just the way it is, Professor Cowen asserts. Live with it and give up the classical liberal and libertarian idea of prosperity and a highly limited government. With prosperity will come bigger government, he asserts.

"The 'inevitability' implied in this is, in fact, nothing of the sort. It could be just as reasonably argued that as the members of the society grow in wealth and improved standards of living, they will need and desire less government dependency and support. Rising standards of living enable more people to financially support themselves, as well as providing the means for those gaining in material comfort and ease to have the monetary means to demonstrate more willingness and generosity to assist some who may still be less well off than themselves through avenues of private charity and philanthropy; plus, having the greater leisure time to participate in such endeavors through the institutions of civil society.

"Why any such spirit of private giving and benevolence has diminished in fairly wealthy countries in Europe and in various circles in the United States may be taken as the consequences resulting from governmental redistributive largess and an ideology that has weakened the belief in or the goodness of 'self-reliance' and personal responsibility.... Ten years ago, the German news magazine “Der Spiegel,” reported that in a survey of leading businessmen in Germany, the vast majority said that private giving was not their responsibility; it was the job of government....  Where did that come from, other than an ideological and intellectual culture that presumes and persuades too many in society that political paternalism is superior to personal responsibility and the voluntary private sector....

"Why do so many people accept the notion that imposing and raising legal minimum wages are good for people at the lower income levels? Do they have some inexplicable “propensity” to demand higher wages for others through government mandate as their own economic circumstances improve? I think the more reasonable explanation is a failure to understand and appreciate all the implications of the logic and reality of supply and demand in labor markets. That is, it is the result of wrong and faulty ideas that are sometimes easier to impress upon people than the often abstract and indirect chains of causation through which market processes operate, including in the demand for labor.

"So, if we observe that as wealth and material betterment have improved in our society, people at the same time have been supporting increases in redistributive welfare programs, the more rational explanation is an educational, cultural and intellectual setting in which academics and opinion makers and writers have been successful in influencing the climate of ideas in socialist and welfare statist directions through their ability to interpret the past and the present through the prism of their collectivist ideas."

Read more: https://wallstreetwindow.com/2020/01/not-losing-sight-of-the-classical-liberal-ideal-richard-m-ebeling-01-07-2020/
'via Blog this'

Beck joins Celebrity Santas paying layaway debts

Tyler Perry paid 1,500 Walmart layaway accounts, but layaway has risks - Vox - Nadra Nittle:

December 12, 2018 - "This week, filmmaker Tyler Perry and musician Kid Rock made headlines for taking part in what’s become a holiday tradition among some wealthy people: paying off the layaway accounts of strangers. Layaway allows shoppers who can’t pay for merchandise all at once to reserve the product and pay for it in installments. While stores offer layaway year-round, it is especially popular during the fall when consumers use it to purchase holiday gifts that typically cost at least $50.

"Perry cleared the Walmart layaway accounts of 1,500 Atlanta-area shoppers, a deed that totaled $434,000. Inspired by the Madea star, Kid Rock paid off $81,000 in layaway balances at a Nashville Walmart. And last week Gayle Benson, owner of New Orleans sports teams the Saints and the Pelicans, paid off about $100,000 in Walmart layaway balances."

Read more: https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/12/12/18138124/tyler-perry-walmart-layaway-risky-low-income-shoppers

Glenn Beck's Christmas Charity is a Great Example of Libertarian Principles - The Libertarian Republic - Caleb Shumate:

December 13, 2018 - "This past Saturday, nationally syndicated political commentator Glenn Beck demonstrated to our country the beauty of private charity when he and his family walked into a Walmart in North Richland Hills, Texas and spent $27,000 paying off people’s layaways for the holidays. Glenn did this while streaming on Facebook Live and then issued a challenge to Mark Levin, Steven Crowder, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and other conservative commentators to do the same.

"Beck cited that he and his family were inspired to do this by Tyler Perry, who paid off $434,000 for 1,500 people.... This ... is an excellent example of our ideas put into practice.

"We often complain about the evils of the welfare state, but if we want the government to do less, we have to do more. I believe ... that if we get the government out of the way, we not only can but will help those in need more efficiently. Instead [of] the government 'robbing collective Peter to pay collective Paul,' we can help those in need by giving them a hand up instead of a handout....

"I will gladly voluntarily give my wealth and time to help those who need it, but I cannot stand for the government taking the wealth of individuals and then giving it to other individuals creating a never-ending cycle of dependency and then having the gall to call that help!...

"I want to thank Tyler Perry, Glenn Beck, and Kid Rock, for their sincere charitable actions and for showing the country, as well as the world, that private charity is always the way to go – and of course, for reminding us of the reason for the Christmas season."

Read more: https://thelibertarianrepublic.com/glenn-becks-christmas-charity-is-a-great-example-of-libertarian-principles/
'via Blog this'

The free market's safety net

The Sharing Economy Is a Free Market Safety Net - Foundation for Economic Education - Working for a free and prosperous world - Brittany Hunter:

September 15, 2017 - "The sharing economy has been one of the most groundbreaking market creations in our modern time even though its concept is quite simple. If you own a car, you can earn money as a driver. If you have an apartment or home, you can earn money renting out the space. There really isn’t much to the sharing economy. If you have property or a skill that is in demand by another consumer, you have the ability to earn money. And for those in between jobs or trying to figure out their next employment move, the sharing economy can be a lifesaver....

"I once had the pleasure of riding with a driver who was currently out of work while she was recovering from surgery ... and ... had used up all her paid time off.... But thanks to Uber, my driver didn’t have to worry about income or filing for short-term disability or other welfare programs while she waited to get back to work. She was earning money while avoiding the stir-crazy feelings of being trapped inside her house while she healed.

"Another driver I rode with in DC had recently moved to the United States from the Middle East and was trying to start his own catering business. Not only did Uber allow him to pay his bills while he was starting his business, it also helped him network. Each of his passengers was given a business card and one free 'trial' meal which he would personally deliver....

"I could tell dozens of these stories, as I am sure many of you could as well. Ridesharing helped all these drivers provide for their well being and even helped some build their businesses. But ridesharing is only one small sector in the broader sharing economy.

"One of the most stressful components of sudden unemployment is the worry that rent won’t be paid. But the homesharing sector has also provided a solution. As long as you have a friend who is willing to let you sleep on their couch or perhaps family who resides nearby, there are ways to rent out your lodgings in order to pay the bills.

"But the sharing economy is not limited to property. There are many who many find themselves unemployed without either a car or a rentable living space, but they may have a skill. Smartphone apps like TaskRabbit allow users to sell their own labor. If you possess the muscles needed to move boxes all day, you can become a mover. If you are capable of mowing a lawn, you can find someone in need of a yard trimming.... For those in the beauty or wellness world, there are also apps that will connect cosmetologists and hairstylists to clients....

"Work is not some construct invented by evil capitalists.... It is a source of pride and self-esteem.... When that daily opportunity to take pride in creation is removed because a person is unemployed, especially for longer periods of time, there are psychological impacts that extend far beyond the stress that comes with money problems. In fact, depression and unemployment are an ominous duo.

"Uber and ridesharing in general is a great way to not only socialize with other humans, but can also be beneficial for preparing for an interview. Once you are able to master the art of conversation without the often accompanying nerves, you have gained a skill that may help during the interview process.

"Is the sharing economy the perfect solution to the problem of unemployment? Absolutely not. But neither is our current unemployment system.... Our current unemployment system comes with red tape, strings attached, and a whole lot of bureaucracy. And all this must be endured before even receiving that first unemployment check. But so long as the government allows the existence of the sharing economy, the market can continue offering nearly instant employment opportunities to those looking for work."

Read more: https://fee.org/articles/the-sharing-economy-is-a-free-market-safety-net/
'via Blog this'

A better way to secure the border

Ron Paul: How About a Better Solution Than Donald Trump’s Border Wall? | Opinions - Noozhawk.com:

February 2, 2017 - "Just one week in office, President Donald Trump is already following through on his pledge to address illegal immigration. His Jan. 25 executive order called for the construction of a wall along the entire length of the U.S.-Mexico border ... his proposed solution will unfortunately not lead us anywhere closer to solving the problem.

"First, the wall will not work. Texas already started building a border fence about 10 years ago. It divided people from their own property across the border, it deprived people of their land through the use of eminent domain, and in the end the problem of drug and human smuggling was not solved.

"Second, the wall will be expensive.... Trump has claimed that if the Mexican government doesn’t pay for it, he will impose a 20 percent duty on products imported from Mexico. Who will pay this tax? Ultimately, the American consumer....

"Although Trump is right to prioritize the problem of border security, he misses the point on how it can be done effectively and at an actual financial benefit to the country....

The solution to really addressing the problem of illegal immigration, drug smuggling and the threat of cross-border terrorism is clear: remove the welfare magnet that attracts so many to cross the border illegally, stop the 25-year U.S. war in the Middle East and end the drug war that incentivizes smugglers to cross the border.

The various taxpayer-funded programs that benefit illegal immigrants in the United States — such as direct financial transfers, medical benefits, food assistance and education — cost an estimated $100 billion per year.... It is estimated that since President Richard Nixon declared a war on drugs, the United States has spent more than $1 trillion to fight what is a losing battle.

"Finally, ... we must soberly consider why [terrorists] may seek to do us harm.... We have been dropping bombs on the Middle East since at least 1990. Last year, President Barack Obama dropped more than 26,000 bombs. Thousands of civilians have been killed.... Ending this senseless intervention will go a long way toward removing the incentive to attack the United States....

"Trump’s plan to build a wall will end up costing a fortune while ignoring the real problem of why people cross the borders illegally. They will keep coming as long as those incentives remain."

Read more: https://www.noozhawk.com/article/ron_paul_a_better_solution_than_donald_trumps_border_wall_20170202
'via Blog this'

Niskanen economist urges Universal Basic Income

Why Should a Libertarian Take Universal Basic Income Seriously? - Niskanen Center - Edwin G. Dolan:

February 6, 2017 - "In a recent post on EconLog, Bryan Caplan writes, 'I’m baffled that anyone with libertarian sympathies takes the UBI [universal basic income] seriously.' I love a challenge.... Here are three kinds of libertarians who might take a UBI very seriously indeed.

"[W]hat galls many libertarians most about government is the failure of many policies to produce their intended results. Poverty policy is Exhibit A.... A UBI would help by ending the way benefit reductions and 'welfare cliffs' in current programs undermine work incentives ... a worker from a poor household can end up taking home nothing, even from a full-time job. A UBI has no benefit reductions. You get it whether you work or not, so you keep every added dollar you earn (income and payroll taxes excepted, and these are low for the poor).

"But ... Why would I work at all if you gave me a UBI? That might be a problem if you got your UBI on top of existing programs, but if it replaced those programs, work incentives would be strengthened, not weakened.... Or, you might say, a UBI might be fine for the poor, but wouldn’t it be unaffordable to give it to the middle class and the rich as well? Yes, if you added it on top of all the middle-class welfare and tax loopholes for the rich that we have now. No, if the UBI replaced existing tax preferences and other programs....

"Many classical liberals, even those whom purist libertarians lionize in other contexts, are more open to the idea of a social safety net.... In his book Law, Legislation, and Liberty, classical liberal Friedrich Hayek wrote, "The assurance of a certain minimum income for everyone, or a sort of floor below which nobody need fall even when he is unable to provide for himself, appears not only to be a wholly legitimate protection against a risk common to all, but a necessary part of the Great Society."

"Once the philosophical hurdle is overcome, the practical advantages of a UBI become highly attractive. In terms of administrative efficiency and work incentives, a UBI wins hands down over the current welfare system, and beats even the negative income tax famously championed by Milton Friedman, another classical liberal,.

"The libertarian sympathies of still others arise from the conviction that all people should be able to live their lives according to their own values, so long as they don’t interfere with the right of others to do likewise. These lifestyle libertarians are drawn to a UBI because of its contrast with the nanny state mentality that characterizes current policies. Why should social programs treat married couples differently from people living in unconventional communal arrangements? Why should welfare recipients have to undergo intrusive drug testing? Why should food stamps let you buy hamburger and feed it to your dog, but not buy dog food?....

"A UBI is a policy for pragmatic critics of well-intentioned but ineffective government, for classical liberals, and for advocates of personal freedom. No wonder so many libertarians take the idea seriously."

Read more: https://niskanencenter.org/blog/libertarian-take-universal-basic-income-seriously/

Welfare state 'screws' millennials, Johnson tells Kimmel (video)

UPDATED! Gary Johnson on Jimmy Kimmel Live: Millennials Are Getting "Screwed" - Hit & Run : Reason.com - Nick Gillespie:

October 20, 2016 - "Immediately after last night's final presidential debate, Libertarian Party presidential nominee Gary Johnson appeared on ABC's Jimmy Kimmel Live! to discuss a wide range of topics, including debt and deficits, marijuana legalization, foreign policy, and whether the former two-term New Mexico governor plans to run again in 2020 (answer: no).

"Here's Johnson explaining why he's polling well among millenials. It's worth a quick watch, as it lays out the mostly undeclared generational warfare that has been rolled out through most of the 21st century. Younger, relatively poor Americans are being forced to pay for the health care, retirement, and safety of older, wealthier people. The big catch? Those same entitlement programs are unsustainable, so they will be long gone by the time that millennials expect to collect on their 'investments.'"

Read more: http://reason.com/blog/2016/10/20/gary-johnson-on-jimmy-kimmel-live-millen
'via Blog this'

The Christian case for libertarianism

The Christian Case For Libertarianism - Brian Hawkins, The Federalist:

December 16, 2015 - "Libertarianism is the natural political ideology for Christians because it promotes individual freedom. 1 Peter 2:16 reads, 'As freemen, yet not using liberty as a cloak for vice, but as bondservants of God.' Men free from the chains of government can maximize our liberties to help our fellow man through private charity and evangelism.

"When government is limited, man becomes subject to the will of God as opposed to the will of man. Government weakens intimate bonds between the individual and the family, replaces individual charity with coerced redistribution, and uses the threat of violence against person and property in order to dictate the behavior of private individuals. The evils of government threaten all people, but ought to be particularly concerning to Christians....

"Compassionate conservatives and Christian progressives alike have cited the gospels as justification for the welfare state.... Yes, Jesus called us to love our neighbors, help the poor, feed the hungry, and tend to the sick; however, these are commands to individuals, not to the state.

"Compassionate justifications for the welfare state are illegitimate because true compassion is based out of one’s personal generosity. When the state attempts the role of charity, its only means of doing so is through physical force. To support its welfare state, government must tax private citizens, and quite heavily. If a citizen refuses to pay taxes, the government must resort to violence and imprisonment to force the dissenter to comply....

"One might argue that Jesus Christ’s command in Matthew 22:21 — 'Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s” — exhorts Christians to dutifully pay their taxes and follow the laws of man. On the contrary, in Acts 4, state officials ordered the apostles John and Peter to cease preaching the gospel. John responded at verse 19, 'Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.' This seems to suggest that there is a point at which Christians may disobey their earthly rulers.....

"Too often government prevents Christians from doing their Christian duties. When the government levies taxes, we have less money to help the poor. When government restricts religious speech, we cannot evangelize. When government welfare policy encourages single-parenthood through financial incentives, the family is weakened. When government distributes Social Security checks, adult children neglect their responsibilities to their elderly parents. When government mandates that religious organizations provide contraceptives to their employees, we are forced to destroy God’s greatest gift — life....

"Traditional Christian theology proffers that man is inherently sinful. Man’s inherent original sin makes no person among us just, pure, or wise enough to govern other men. Too often we have found ourselves disappointed by politicians, kings, and other legal authorities. The rational response, therefore, is not to make more strict laws or to increase legal oversight. Rather, it should be to limit government power....

"Whether it is government forcing charity or banning social vices, it cannot make man better. Instead, only the grace of Jesus Christ liberates man from sinful and socially damaging behaviors. Consequently, Christians ought to be extremely hesitant and skeptical of government attempts to codify Christian morality into the law."

Read more: http://thefederalist.com/2015/12/16/the-christian-case-for-libertarianism/

'via Blog this'

A libertarian perspective on the Baltimore riots

Nick Pandelidis: A Libertarian perspective on the Baltimore riots - York Daily Record:

May 8, 2015 - "I ... offer some reflections on the Baltimore riots. My purpose is not to present rigorous arguments regarding causes and potential solutions but rather to make a few broad observations from a libertarian perspective.

"The first observation is the changed nature of inner-city policing. Not so long ago, inner cities were composed of mostly civil neighborhoods where police protected and served the law-abiding citizen majority from a small population of criminals. Now, those neighborhoods have morphed into war zones where many young black men are (often not inappropriately) designated as criminal elements and have their constitutional rights routinely violated — including being beaten or killed for 'resisting arrest.' On the other side of the equation, police legitimately fear for their lives patrolling armed-drug-gang-controlled neighborhoods. And law-abiding citizens are caught in the crossfire....

"The second observation is that a misguided and failed war against drugs has significantly contributed to the breakdown of inner-city civil order. Criminalization of drugs has driven up prices and made drug dealing the most profitable and seemingly most glamorous employment option available to many inner-city youth.

"U.S. taxpayers have spent more than $1 trillion over the four decades of the war on drugs. And yet, the U.S. is the first in the world in illegal drug use, addiction rates are no lower, overdose death rates are at all-time highs, and tens of thousands of persons have died in drug-related violence in the U.S., Mexico and South America. In addition, our legal system has more than 500,000 individuals in prison for drug violations.

"The third observation relates to another failed government war, the war on poverty. Since the beginning of the Great Society in 1965, taxpayers have spent $15 trillion on anti-poverty programs and continue to spend more than $700 billion annually. And yet, the poverty rate which fell dramatically during the economic expansion of the prior 25 years has essentially remained unchanged since the war on poverty began.

"However well-meaning the original intent of our welfare system, it is undeniable that this "social safety net" program has resulted in unwed motherhood rates exceeding 80 percent and families nearly completely absent of fathers. The sons of single mothers in these fatherless communities are the principal perpetrators of violent crime in our cities today.

"The final observation is the evident pent-up anger and frustration manifested in the rioters' destruction of businesses and property within their own communities. This social unrest is less a product of poverty and more a product of a sense of hopelessness from a lack of economic opportunity and the humiliation of dependency....

"The poor in America are trapped on two sides. On one hand, they can't achieve because of the failure of inner-city government k-12 schools to provide the educational foundation for marketable skills, minimum wage regulation and occupational licensing preventing entrance into the work force, and general tax and regulatory burdens hindering small business formation. And on the other, welfare programs have provided an easy way to survive and promoted dependency.... In retrospect, the very social and tax policies that were conceived to help the poor have only ensconced dependency and hopelessness."

Read more: http://www.ydr.com/letters/ci_28075995/nick-pandelidis-libertarian-perspective-baltimore-riots
'via Blog this'

Why Charles Murray supports guaranteed income

Libertarian Charles Murray: The welfare state has denuded our civic culture | Making Sen$e | PBS NewsHour:

April 10, 2010 - "Switzerland is considering a ballot referendum on an unconditional income of 30,000 Francs for all Swiss citizens.... But ... guaranteed basic income ... has plenty of American proponents.... Perhaps most outspoken among them is libertarian economist Charles Murray, who argues that a guaranteed income administered by the government would take the government out of people’s lives, and consequently, restore the fabric of American culture.... The following transcript of Paul Solman’s extended conversation with Murray about the guaranteed income has been edited and condensed for length and clarity....

Paul Solman: What’s the case for a minimum income?
Charles Murray: From a libertarian’s point of view, we’re going to be spending a lot of money on income transfers, no matter what.
Paul Solman: Why?
Charles Murray: The society is too rich to stand aside and say, “We aren’t going to do anything for people in need.” I understand that; I accept that; I sympathize with it.
    "What I want is a grand compromise between the left and the right. We on the right say, 'We will give you huge government, in terms of the amount of money we spend. You give us small government, in terms of the ability of government to mess around with people’s lives.'
    "So you have a system whereby every month, a check goes into an electronic bank account for everybody over the age of 21, which they can use as they see fit. They can get together with other people and then combine their resources. But they live their own lives. We put their lives back in their hands"

Read more: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/libertarian-charles-murray-the-welfare-state-has-denuded-our-civic-culture/
'via Blog this'

Guaranteed Income as a Replacement for the Welfare State, by Charles Murray

Cato Institute report advocates denying immigrants welfare

Libertarian Think Tank: Build a Wall Around Welfare - ABC News - Jim Avila and Serena Marshall:

July 24, 2013 - "While the libertarian Cato Institute admits  that immigrants overwhelmingly come to the United States to work and not to go on welfare, to appease right-wing critics of immigration reform it has developed a plan to deny any federal benefits to tax-paying undocumented workers, even after they achieve legal status.

"The goal of the report, titled 'Building a Wall Around the Welfare State, Instead of the Country,' is to provide a 'blueprint'.... It outlines ways to deny immigrants and the undocumented access to any means-tested welfare programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and food stamps.

"'We tried to address the issue about certain use and abuse by noncitizens, no matter how small it is,' Alexander Nowrasteh, policy analyst for Cato and author of the report, said. 'It is necessary to convince those skeptics or those who are in the middle — the honest observers of the debate who are trying to come to a decision about the benefits of immigration reform.'"

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/07/libertarian-think-tank-build-a-wall-around-welfare/
'via Blog this'