Taxes and Social Mobility

My cousin wrote an expose of the lucky sperm club, linked below, that makes references to Libertarian reluctance to pay taxes. As a libertarian I understand that taxes must be collected to defend the country and maintain a judiciary to interpret the law and a police to keep it. I would disagree with any tax being an unfair burden, though too high a tax is a form of enslavement where property is unfairly taken from an individual for redistribution to another. Taxes that are so costly to administer that they generate more heat through friction then revenue are especially noxious since the usual beneficiaries are financiers, tax lawyers, accountants and lobbyist. Steve Schwarzman of Blackstone defense of the carry interest comes to mind along with all the other tax benefits his firm enjoys. I prefer simple to interpret taxes that avoids re-distributing to fat cats.

Taxes that are complicated and costly to administer, and labeled as “fair”, have more to do with life as a lottery with preordained results described in The Grasshopper and The Ant. Unlike Adam Smith's invisible hand of players acting in their self interest directing economic activity with a price mechanism toward a common good, other systems require costly influence peddlers to define what is fair and administrators to maintain it. It is my contention that those working outside of the invisible hand to direct and administer are the self perpetuating class that propagates complex and expensive taxes that hinder social mobility most unfairly. 

Grasshopper and the Ant

Columbine Connecticut

As a Libertarian I am agonizing over the horrible massacre of innocents in Newtown Connecticut this past week.  I live in Connecticut, a sane and sober place in general, so that I can't attribute the horror to a redneck culture alien to New England. It is apparent that the School system was up to the minute with  post Columbine lock down procedures at the school.  It appears the guns were legally purchased by the mother who was her son's first victim and so I am flummoxed about my NRA approved libertarian view on gun control.

I prefer zealous enforcement of the laws and rules already on the books rather than adding more.     Go ahead and close the loop hole for individual sale and clean up the code.  Background checks for everyone, no exceptions.   Nothing denigrates authority more than one un-enforced law piled on top of another.

Finally I  would like to promote a more Swiss attitude about guns where there is an assault weapon in every home as part of the militia ready to take arms and defend the country at a moments notice but where guns are not glorified as they may have been in the Lanza home.

      

The Decline of Evangelical America

Decline of Evangelical America

If true, then possibly Evangelicals should stay out of politics and keep paramount the separation of Church and State to stop and reverse the decline.  Morality is more appropriately taught in family, church and community and not legislated.  The last election made clear the futility of pushing a moral agenda.

In Islam there is a prohibition to drink alcoholic beverages and in many countries, where the majority rule is Islam, drink is prohibited by law as well.  My question to Evangelicals is; who is more worthy in God's eyes? The sinner who voluntarily resists temptation or the sinner who has no opportunity to resist?

Dred Scott

Justice Scalia mentioned on Charlie Rose the Dred Scott decision a week or two ago and my re-reading of Kearns Goodwin's Team of Rivals after seeing the movie "Lincoln" re-enforces my opinion of how "Authoritarian" thinking lead to a ghastly error in the Supreme Court's record.  I don't think the court  is going to make the same mistake with the gay marriage decisions that it will hear in March of next year. Equal protection under the law and minority rights super trump majority rule and I have no fear that the Justices considering the Constitution to be an enduring document can see it any other way.

The G.O.P.’s Existential Crisis

Republican Existential Crisis

Krugman on the left and I as a Libertarian see the crisis clearly.  The G.O.P. decries the growth of government spending yet while in charge grow and spend much more than the previous Democrat  administration. For example, Bill Clinton was a sane and sober steward of the economy while "W" on the other hand went on an insane frat house drunken binge.  I don't think the electorate has forgiven the Republican performance of 2001 through 2009 sufficiently to trust them this last election with another presidential term.  If they keep up their authoritarian anti gay, immigrant and drug decriminalization dependency, then they are destined to back very big and instrusive government policies that put a lie to their small government punditry.

I speak for the President

The MIT economist, Simon Johnson, was on a Paul Solomon segment of the PBS “News Hour” a few nights back and I can't help feeling what a wonderful method he has for explaining current economic issues by looking back at American history. President Obama could use such an Economic Advisor. I am big proponent for smaller government, especially administrative expense such as too many cabinet posts. I would like to see complete reliance on a Treasury Secretary for the mechanics of managing the economy, for example, and that the White House Economic Advisor be without staff and just provide the President with a big picture historical perspective such as what Johnson provides.

The observation comes from my recent viewing of “Lincoln” and Kearns Goodwin's book Team of Rivals show Lincoln working intimately with his cabinet and constituents. I resent the growth of government that it requires the President to staff up so that interaction between within his own cabinet is in his name only. The words “I speak for the President” scare me.

So What

I saw Justice Anton Scalia on Charlie Rose a few nights ago. I was inclined toward lukewarm support because of his Strict Constructionist label as I always had trouble with strict. The interview converted me into a big fan with his explanation of the Constitution as an enduring document and his “So What” view of prominent decisions putting the living constitution in the best light. Beside that, I found the hour to be a relaxed engaging exchange between friends that I felt privileged to witness and well worth my Patron donation to PBS Chanel Thirteen.