05.07.13
by

Lew Rockwell: Another Nail in the Neocon Coffin

The recent opening of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity was a watershed moment in American history. There has never been anything quite like it. Ideologically diverse, the Ron Paul Institute reaches out to all Americans, and indeed to people all over the world, who find the spectrum of foreign-policy opinion in the United States to be unreasonably narrow. Until Ron Paul and his new institute, there was no resolutely anti-interventionist foreign-policy organization to be found.

Neoconservatives have not responded warmly to the announcement of Ron’s new institute. Whatever their particular gripes, we can be absolutely certain of the real reason for their unhappiness: they have never faced systematic, organized opposition before.

The Democrats would see the earth tumble into the sun before supporting nonintervention abroad, so they pose no fundamental problem for the neocons. Ron Paul, on the other hand, is real opposition, and he can mobilize an army. The neocons know it. What’s Tim Pawlenty up to these days? Where are his legions of well-read young fans who seek to carry on his philosophy? You see the point.

For the first time, strict nonintervention will have a permanent voice in American life. It is another nail in the neocon coffin. The neocons know they are losing the young. Bright kids who believe in freedom aren’t rallying to Mitt Romney or David Horowitz, and, like anyone with a critical mind and a moral compass, they are not going along with the regime’s war propaganda.

At this historic moment, I thought it might be appropriate to set down some thoughts on war – a manifesto for peace, as it were.

(1) Our rulers are not a law unto themselves.

Our warmakers believe they are exempt from normal moral rules. Because they are at war, they get to suspend all decency, all the norms that govern the conduct and interaction of human beings in all other circumstances. The anodyne term “collateral damage,” along with perfunctory and meaningless words of regret, are employed when innocent civilians, including children, are maimed and butchered. A private individual behaving this way would be called a sociopath. Give him a fancy title and a nice suit, and he becomes a statesman.

Let us pursue the subversive mission of applying the same moral rules against theft, kidnapping, and murder to our rulers that we apply to everyone else.

(2) Humanize the demonized.

We must encourage all efforts to humanize the populations of countries in the crosshairs of the warmakers. The general public is whipped into a war frenzy without knowing the first thing – or hearing only propaganda – about the people who will die in that war. The establishment’s media won’t tell their story, so it is up to us to use all the resources we as individuals have, especially online, to communicate the most subversive truth of all: that the people on the other side are human beings, too. This will make it marginally more difficult for the warmakers to carry out their Two Minutes’ Hate, and can have the effect of persuading Americans with normal human sympathies to distrust the propaganda that surrounds them.

(3) If we oppose aggression, let us oppose all aggression.

If we believe in the cause of peace, putting a halt to aggressive violence between nations is not enough. We should not want to bring about peace overseas in order that our rulers may turn their guns on peaceful individuals at home. Away with all forms of aggression against peaceful people.

(4) Never use “we” when speaking of the government.

The people and the warmakers are two distinct groups. We must never say “we” when discussing the US government’s foreign policy. For one thing, the warmakers do not care about the opinions of the majority of Americans. It is silly and embarrassing for Americans to speak of “we” when discussing their government’s foreign policy, as if their input were necessary to or desired by those who make war.

But it is also wrong, not to mention mischievous. When people identify themselves so closely with their government, they perceive attacks on their government’s foreign policy as attacks on themselves. It then becomes all the more difficult to reason with them – why, you’re insulting my foreign policy!

Likewise, the use of “we” feeds into war fever. “We” have to get “them.” People root for their governments as they would for a football team. And since we know ourselves to be decent and good, “they” can only be monstrous and evil, and deserving of whatever righteous justice “we” dispense to them.

The antiwar left falls into this error just as often. They appeal to Americans with a catalogue of horrific crimes “we” have committed. But we haven’t committed those crimes. The same sociopaths who victimize Americans themselves every day, and over whom we have no real control, committed those crimes.

(4) War is not “good for the economy.”

A commitment to peace is a wonderful thing and worthy of praise, but it needs to be coupled with an understanding of economics. A well-known US senator recently deplored cuts in military spending because “when you cut military spending you lose jobs.” There is no economic silver lining to war or to preparation for war.

Those who would tell us that war brings prosperity are grossly mistaken, even in the celebrated case of World War II. The particular stimulus that war gives to certain sectors of the economy comes at the expense of civilian needs, and directs resources away from the improvement of the common man’s standard of living.

Ludwig von Mises, the great free-market economist, wrote, that “war prosperity is like the prosperity that an earthquake or a plague brings. The earthquake means good business for construction workers, and cholera improves the business of physicians, pharmacists, and undertakers; but no one has for that reason yet sought to celebrate earthquakes and cholera as stimulators of the productive forces in the general interest.”

Elsewhere, Mises described the essence of so-called war prosperity: it “enriches some by what it takes from others. It is not rising wealth but a shifting of wealth and income.”

(5) Support the free market? Then oppose war.

Ron Paul has restored the proper association of capitalism with peace and nonintervention. Leninists and other leftists, burdened by a false understanding of economics and the market system, used to claim that capitalism needed war, that alleged “overproduction” of goods forced market societies to go abroad – and often to war – in search for external markets for their excess goods.

This was always economic nonsense. It was political nonsense, too: the free market needs no parasitical institution to grease the skids for international commerce, and the same philosophy that urges nonaggression among individual human beings compels nonaggression between geographical areas.

—–

Click below for the full article.

http://www.24hgold.com/english/news-gold-silver-another-nail-in-the-neocon-coffin.aspx?article=4355092296G10020&redirect=false&contributor=Lew+Rockwell

05.07.13
by

Reuters: U.S. appeals court strikes down mandate on union rights

The National Labor Relations Board violated the law when it required U.S. businesses to put notices in their workplaces and on their websites informing employees of their right to unionize, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday.

A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit struck down the rule, finding that federal law prohibits the labor board from punishing a business for speech, or lack of it, as long as the business does not issue threats.

Freedom of speech “necessarily protects … the right of employers (and unions) not to speak,” Judge Raymond Randolph wrote for the appeals court.

In mandating the notices in 2011, a majority of the labor board appointed by President Barack Obama said that employees cannot fully exercise their rights unless they know what their rights are.

Business trade associations sued within days, arguing that the “11-by-17” posters violated corporate speech rights.

The ruling for the trade associations, including the National Association of Manufacturers, is the second major defeat at the appeals court for the labor board this year.

In January, the court invalidated Obama’s appointments to the board during a period of congressional inactivity. The Obama administration has since asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the ruling.

—–

Click below for the article on Reuters.com

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/07/us-usa-courts-laborboard-idUSBRE9460LD20130507

05.06.13
by

Business 2 Community: U.S. Dollar to Become the Next Yen?

In its latest meeting minutes, the Federal Reserve said it will continue with quantitative easing, creating $85.0 billion in new money monthly, in order to bring economic growth to the U.S. economy. (Source: Federal Reserve, May 1, 2013.)

The Federal Reserve, once again, didn’t provide any clear indication as to when it will end the quantitative easing; rather, the central bank stated it will continue to do the same “until the outlook for the labor market has improved substantially in context of price stability.” (Source: Ibid.)

The Federal Reserve has already increased its balance sheet to over $3.0 trillion, and if it continues its quantitative easing at this pace, its balance sheet will balloon even more, possibly even reaching $4.0 trillion—or even $5.0 trillion—in a very short period of time.

This is troublesome news, dear reader. The more money created out of thin air via quantitative easing, the more the fundamentals of the reserve currency, the U.S. dollar, deteriorate.

As I have mentioned in these pages before, we only need to look at the Japanese economy to see quantitative easing is not a viable option for us.

The Japanese currency has plummeted since the Bank of Japan revved up its quantitative easing. Just look at the chart below of the Japanese yen compared to other major currencies in the global economy; it seems as if the currency has fallen off a cliff. If we keep up with all this money printing, the U.S. dollar may eventually look the same!

U.S. Dollar to Become the Next Yen? image xjy japanese yen philadelphia index1

Chart courtesy of www.StockCharts.com

A falling U.S. dollar will drag down the buying power of Americans even further, as they are already struggling to keep up with their expenses. What we could purchase for $1.00 in the year 2000 now costs us $1.35. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, last accessed May 3, 2013.)

I have yet to see any real economic growth in the U.S. economy as it was promised when quantitative easing was first introduced after the financial crisis. Quantitative easing is working to make big bank balance sheets strong and to create inflation, but I don’t see any economic growth being created by it.

I am looking at the Japanese economy as the best example of a country failing with long-term quantitative easing and what might be next for the U.S. economy and the dollar due to all this newly created money.

—-

Click below for the full article.

http://www.business2community.com/finance/u-s-dollar-to-become-the-next-yen-0486009

05.05.13
by

NY Times: U.S. Engaged in Torture After 9/11, Review Concludes

A nonpartisan, independent review of interrogation and detention programs in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks concludes that “it is indisputable that the United States engaged in the practice of torture” and that the nation’s highest officials bore ultimate responsibility for it.

The sweeping, 600-page report says that while brutality has occurred in every American war, there never before had been “the kind of considered and detailed discussions that occurred after 9/11 directly involving a president and his top advisers on the wisdom, propriety and legality of inflicting pain and torment on some detainees in our custody.” The study, by an 11-member panel convened by the Constitution Project, a legal research and advocacy group, is to be released on Tuesday morning.

Debate over the coercive interrogation methods used by the administration of President George W. Bush has often broken down on largely partisan lines. The Constitution Project’s task force on detainee treatment, led by two former members of Congress with experience in the executive branch — a Republican, Asa Hutchinson, and a Democrat, James R. Jones — seeks to produce a stronger national consensus on the torture question.

While the task force did not have access to classified records, it is the most ambitious independent attempt to date to assess the detention and interrogation programs. A separate 6,000-page report on the Central Intelligence Agency’s record by the Senate Intelligence Committee, based exclusively on agency records, rather than interviews, remains classified.

“As long as the debate continues, so too does the possibility that the United States could again engage in torture,” the report says.

The use of torture, the report concludes, has “no justification” and “damaged the standing of our nation, reduced our capacity to convey moral censure when necessary and potentially increased the danger to U.S. military personnel taken captive.” The task force found “no firm or persuasive evidence” that these interrogation methods produced valuable information that could not have been obtained by other means. While “a person subjected to torture might well divulge useful information,” much of the information obtained by force was not reliable, the report says.

Interrogation and abuse at the C.I.A.’s so-called black sites, the Guantánamo Bay prison in Cuba and war-zone detention centers, have been described in considerable detail by the news media and in declassified documents, though the Constitution Project report adds many new details.

It confirms a report by Human Rights Watch that one or more Libyan militants were waterboarded by the C.I.A., challenging the agency’s longtime assertion that only three Al Qaeda prisoners were subjected to the near-drowning technique. It includes a detailed account by Albert J. Shimkus Jr., then a Navy captain who ran a hospital for detainees at the Guantánamo Bay prison, of his own disillusionment when he discovered what he considered to be the unethical mistreatment of prisoners.

But the report’s main significance may be its attempt to assess what the United States government did in the years after 2001 and how it should be judged. The C.I.A. not only waterboarded prisoners, but slammed them into walls, chained them in uncomfortable positions for hours, stripped them of clothing and kept them awake for days on end.

The question of whether those methods amounted to torture is a historically and legally momentous issue that has been debated for more than a decade inside and outside the government. The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel wrote a series of legal opinions from 2002 to 2005 concluding that the methods were not torture if used under strict rules; all the memos were later withdrawn. News organizations have wrestled with whether to label the brutal methods unequivocally as torture in the face of some government officials’ claims that they were not.

In addition, the United States is a signatory to the international Convention Against Torture, which requires the prompt investigation of allegations of torture and the compensation of its victims.

—–

Click below for the full article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/16/world/us-practiced-torture-after-9-11-nonpartisan-review-concludes.html?_r=1&

05.05.13
by

John Stossel: Why Obamacare Will Be No More Successful Than Soviet Central Planning

Most Americans — even those who are legislators — know very little about the details of President Obama’s Affordable Care Act, so-called Obamacare. Next year, when it goes into effect, we will learn the hard way.

Many people lazily assume that the law will do roughly what it promises: give insurance to the uninsured and lower the cost of health care by limiting spending on dubious procedures.

Don’t count on it.

Consider just the complexity: The act itself is more than 906 pages long, and again and again in those 906 pages are the words, “the Secretary shall promulgate regulations …”

“Secretary” refers to Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius. Her minions have been busy. They’ve already added 20,000 pages of rules. They form a stack 7 feet high, and more are to come.

Our old health care system was already a bureaucratic and regulatory nightmare. It had 16,000 different codes for different ailments. Under our new, “improved” system, there will be more than a 100,000.

Government likes to think regulations can account for every possibility. Injured at a chicken coop? The code for that will be Y9272. Fall at an art gallery? That means you are a Y92250. There are three different codes for walking into a lamppost — depending on how often you’ve walked into lampposts. This is supposed to give government a more precise way to reimburse doctors for treating people and alert us to surges in injuries that might inspire further regulation.

On Government-Planned World, this makes sense. But it will be no more successful than Soviet central planning.

Compare all that to a tiny part of American medicine that is still free-market: Lasik eye surgery.

Its quality has improved, while costs dropped 25 percent. Lasik (and cosmetic surgery) are specialties that provide a better consumer experience because they are a market. Patients pay directly, so doctors innovate constantly to please them. Lasik doctors even give patients their cellphone numbers.

President Obama didn’t kill American free-market health care. It began dying during World War II, when government imposed wage and price controls. At first, companies said, “Great, stability!” But then they realized that they could not attract better workers without raises. So companies got around the rules, as companies do. They gave “benefits,” like health insurance.

Government then distorted the market further by giving employer-based health insurance better tax treatment than coverage you buy yourself.

But employer-based insurance is nuts. Many workers feel locked into their jobs. Company insurance largely destroyed the health care free market, since employees rarely shop for the best service at the lowest price.

Now Obamacare may kill what’s left of that market.

Maybe we will soon be like Canada, where some people wait years for treatment. A producer from my TV show went to a Canadian town where the town clerk pulls names out of a box and then phones people to say: “Congratulations! You get to see a doctor this month!”

—–

Click below for the full article.

http://reason.com/archives/2013/05/01/why-obamacare-will-be-no-more-successful

05.05.13
by

Infowars: Man Sues TSA For $5 Million Following Peanut Butter Arrest

24 hours in a cell  for joking about sandwich spread

An Arizona man who was arrested at the behest of  the TSA, following a wisecrack over a jar of peanut butter is suing the federal  agency for $5 million.

Frank Hannibal, 50, was detained and dragged from LaGuardia  Airport recently by police after a run-in with TSA agents over the jar of  gourmet sandwich spread.

“The liquid oil that separated from the peanut butter had  them baffled,” Hannibal told the New York Daily News.

Hannibal then commented to his wife and children that  “They’re looking to confiscate my explosives,” as TSA agents inspected the  16-ounce jar of “Crazy Richards” chunky peanut butter.

TSA screener Edwin Sanchez, overheard Hannibal’s remark, did  not see the funny side, and immediately called the cops, according to the court  complaint.

Hannibal spent the next 24 hours in a cell, during which time  he was fed a peanut butter sandwich by cops who later charged him with the  felony of “falsely reporting an incident”.

“It sounds laughable now but at the time to be led out of  there like a terrorist was unbelievable,” Hannibal tells the Daily News. “My  whole life was up in the air. It was a nightmare. My children were overwhelmed.  It was crazy.”

Hannibal has brought a $5-million-dollar lawsuit against the  TSA worker and the Port Authority officer who arrested him, all over a $7  confectionary which was returned to him upon his release from jail.

“It’s a sorry state of affairs in this country when sarcasm  is considered a felony,” his attorney, Alan D. Levine of Queens, noted, adding  that TSA agents need to act with common sense in such situations.

This is not an isolated incident. The TSA has a history of  concentrating on looking out for cakes and pies, as well as sauces, oils and vinegars.

The Homeland Security agency has also instituted a crack down on candy and cupcakes.

At the same time, people are routinely waltzing through  security lines with swords, knives, explosives and guns. Many agents are too busy  groping women and searching old people’s diapers to bother checking passports and flight passes.

Still, it’s good to know that the government is keeping  Americans safe from sandwich wielding jokers.

—

Click below to read Steve Watson’s article on infowars.

http://www.infowars.com/man-sues-tsa-for-5-million-following-peanut-butter-arrest/

05.05.13
by

What is the right fix to social security? Is there one?

—-

The above chart is taken from the article “Is Obama’s New Index the Right Fix for Social Security?” from the Wall Street Cheat Sheet’s website, which can be viewed below.  It does start one to question just what has Social Security become and how should we fix it?  (If it should be fixed).

http://wallstcheatsheet.com/stocks/is-obamas-new-index-the-right-fix-for-social-security.html/?a=viewall

05.05.13
by

Motley Fool: The 5 States With No Sales Tax

All 50 states make different choices about where they’re going to get the tax revenue they need in order to provide the services their residents expect and demand. With income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes among the revenue-collecting tools at their disposal, most states end up using a combination of all three to make ends meet.

But some states have chosen not to impose any sales tax at the state level, making it a lot cheaper for shoppers to buy. Using a combination of figures from the Tax Foundation, including general state sales taxes and average local-option surtaxes, let’s look at the five states that don’t have statewide sales taxes with an eye toward identifying the impact their decision has on individuals and businesses.

5. Alaska Although Alaska doesn’t have a statewide tax, it does have local option taxes that amount to an average rate of 1.69%. Alaska doesn’t have an income tax, either, relying solely on property taxes for its sole means of support from individuals. The lion’s share of state revenue, however, comes from royalties and oil tax revenue from ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM ) , ConocoPhillips (NYSE: COP ) , and BP (NYSE: BP) , all of which have extensive operations in the state. Even recent tax cuts on those oil giants hasn’t added to residents’ share of the overall tax burden, and residents also receive checks from the Alaska Permanent Fund amounting to $878 per person in 2012.

4. Montana Like Alaska, Montana also has local-option resort taxes in certain areas of the state, but the Tax Foundation lacked adequate data to measure the average impact of those add-on taxes. Yet many of the most populous areas of the state, including Billings, Bozeman, and Missoula, don’t have any sales taxes at all. Given that state’s remote location, however, having no sales tax doesn’t do much to draw shoppers from neighboring states. Fairly high income taxes offset the lack of sales tax.

3. New Hampshire With the moniker “Live Free or Die,” New Hampshire gives residents a double-tax break, with no sales tax and an income tax that applies only to interest and dividend income. High property taxes make up the difference, but New Hampshire’s proximity to Boston leads to a regular exodus of shoppers across the Massachusetts border to avoid that state’s 6.25% sales tax.

2. Delaware Delaware is a small state, but it plays a vital role in providing a home for most of the nation’s largest corporations. The state’s 8.7% flat corporate income tax rate leads to tax collections that are the seventh highest in the country and help allow Delaware to charge no sales tax. Nearby Philadelphia and Baltimore provide two sources of shoppers seeking tax-free purchases, but shopping malls strategically located on the Interstate 95 corridor do their best to pull in travelers from all over the East Coast.

1. Oregon Of all the sales-tax-free states, Oregon has the closest symbiotic relationship with its neighbor. Washington lies just across the Columbia River from Portland, and the states are near-mirror-images of each other when it comes to taxation, with Washington having a high sales tax but no income tax, while Oregon has a high income tax but no sales tax. As a result, those living in Vancouver, Wash., across the river from Portland, can structure their lives to pay relatively little in income or sales taxes, taking advantage of their proximity to Oregon shopping.

A better way to tax? Many tax advocates believe that sales taxes are the worst way to tax residents, as their consumption focus tends to hit the poor the hardest. By that measure, these five states are most forward-thinking in their tax strategies, although they also clearly believe that they can attract some economic activity by luring shoppers in with tax-free purchase opportunities.

The oil and gas industry has produced plenty of revenue for governments, but it has also brought big profits for investors as well. One promising company is a leading provider of equipment and components used in drilling and production operations, and poised to profit in a big way from it

—–

Click below for the full article.

http://www.fool.com/how-to-invest/personal-finance/taxes/2013/05/05/the-5-states-with-no-sales-tax.aspx

05.05.13
by

AP: Are you a tax cheat if you shop online tax-free?

Buy anything on the Internet lately without paying sales tax? In all but a few states, you’re probably a tax cheat.

That’s right, even if Internet retailers don’t collect sales tax at the time of the purchase, you’re required by law to pay it in 45 states and the District of Columbia.

Here’s the problem for states: hardly anyone pays the tax, and there’s not much states can do about it.

The Senate is expected to pass a bill Monday making it easier for states to collect sales taxes for online purchases. Some of the nation’s largest retailers are rejoicing. But small-business owners who make their living selling products on the Internet worry they will be swamped by new requirements from faraway states.

“It’s a huge burden for a company like ours,” said Sarah Davis, co-owner of Fashionphile.com, a California-based company that sells high-end pre-owned handbags and purses. “We don’t have an accounting department, we’ve got my father-in-law.”

Davis started the company in 1999 and now runs it with her brother-in-law. They have 26 workers and three stores, in Beverly Hills, San Diego and San Francisco. Last year, Fashionphile.com did $10 million in sales, the vast majority of it online, Davis said.

Fashionphile.com sells bags directly from its website and on eBay. The company collects sales taxes from customers who live in California, but not from people who live in other states, Davis said. Under the law, states can only require stores to collect sales taxes if the store has a physical presence in the state.

That means big retailers, such as Wal-Mart, Best Buy and Target, with stores all over the country collect sales taxes when they sell goods over the Internet. But eBay, Amazon and other online retailers don’t have to collect sales taxes, except in states where they have offices or distribution centers.

—-

Yet another story of MORE TAXES, MORE GOVERNMENT, and MORE HARM to small businesses.  How original!  Click below for the full article.

http://news.yahoo.com/tax-cheat-shop-online-tax-125303228.html