Tag Archives: regulation

A Problem with Censorship

Posted on by
Reply

[Ukraine’s] Parliament voted Thursday to ban Soviet as well as Nazi symbols here….

Lawmakers voted 254-0 in favor of the bill, which outlawed any “public rejection of the criminal nature” of the Soviet or Nazi regimes in Ukraine, a former Soviet republic that was overrun by the Germans in World War II.

Their heart is in the right place.

Yuriy Lutsenko, a senior Member of Parliament with the Petro Poroshenko Bloc, added this about the legislation:

Symbols including five-pointed stars and hammers and sickles will disappear from the streets of Ukrainian cities[.]

But the USSR’s flag isn’t the only thing that uses the symbology of a five-pointed star. So do the United States flag and the European Union flag—the latter which Ukraine would like to join.

This illustrates a problem with government censorship. Leaving aside the fundamental inappropriateness of censorship by governments, it’s tough for government to censor narrowly enough to block the target without also blocking the friends.

Liberals and Unions

Posted on by
Reply

In December 2014, the NLRB passed a final rule on a partisan 3-2 vote that greatly shortens the time for a workplace union-organizing election. … Mr. Obama issued a “memorandum of disapproval”—essentially a veto—to kill the Congressional measure [to overturn the rule] and preserve the NLRB rule.

From now on unions will have unlimited time to prepare their campaigns to organize a workplace, springing the election paperwork on an employer when they figure they have the best chance to prevail. By reducing the time before an election to as little as two weeks from the current average of 38 days, unions will be able to lobby workers and make their case before a company can counter with its own argument.

Because with Liberals and unions, there’s only one side to a story. No need to hear from anyone else.

All the more Reason

Posted on by
Reply

…to speed reform of the way in which our economy produces medical care services and in which we pay for them.

[A] 66-year-old couple retiring this year with average Social Security benefits can expect medical costs to consume 67% of the Social Security they will receive in retirement.

A 55-year-old couple who plan to retire in 10 years can expect to devote about 90% of their lifetime Social Security benefits to healthcare costs.

There’s more:

Social Security benefits typically grow by approximately 2% a year—the overall rate of inflation. But medical costs in general tend to rise by more, 5% to 7% a year[.]

There’s this graph, too, that illustrate cost change trends since 1960:HealthCostTrends

Since Obamacare was enacted and has started to take effect (since 2010), the then-eight-year-old trend of decreasing costs has been completely stopped. That’s the effect of government intervention into a free market.

If we’re to correct this, if we’re actually to hold down, not just the rise in costs, but the actual costs themselves, we need to get government out of the way and use free market solutions: get rid of the health welfare that is Obamacare, allow insurance companies—which would sell true insurance policies—to charge premiums based on the actual risk transferred from customer to company, and allow insurance policies to be sold across state lines—that is nationwide.

All government intervention succeeds in doing is preventing competition and market forces from reducing and then holding down costs. Which hits hardest the very people these government programs are claimed to help.

Obama Makes it Official

Posted on by
Reply

Laws don’t apply to him or his White House.

The White House, in a curiously timed move, is stripping a federal regulation that made a particular office subject to reporters’ records requests.

The rule change means the Freedom of Information Act will no longer apply to the White House Office of Administration. In turn, the policy will allow the Obama White House to reject records requests for that office, just as the last Bush White House did.

There’s that Democratic Morality, again. Someone else did it, therefor it’s OK to do it again.

And, just to drive the point home that Obama holds himself above the law, all it takes being a stroke of that pen of his:

In the notice to be published Tuesday, the White House said it was not allowing a 30-day public comment period, and so the rule will be final.

ATF and Gun Control

Posted on by
Reply

They’re not capable of letting this go.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives on Thursday raised new concerns about surplus military ammo used in popular AR-15 rifles and pistols just days after pulling back on a proposal to ban the ammo because it could threaten police safety.

In a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing, ATF Director B Todd Jones said all types of the 5.56 military-style ammo used by shooters pose a threat to police as more people buy the AR-15-style pistols.

So is the ammunition for any firearm a threat. So are knives. So are hammers.

Since the ATF doesn’t understand government’s role in our lives, or its own role in government, maybe it’s time ATF funding was reduced. A lot.

After all, recall that it was the ATF that sold guns to Mexican drug cartels.