Submitted for your consideration: “Ayn Rand is not a supporter of free markets”
That agonized screaming you hear inside your head after reading the linked paragraph is a trillion neurons shrieking in pain.
Missed this one but was alerted to it by Angry Exile, who saw it on Trooper Thompson’s blog, where its pointed out that the media seems to have missed it..
Ron performs well under quite aggressive questioning. If he doesn’t get the nomination, perhaps he would be a better Secretary of the Treasury than the current one.
Update: This now seems to play after reloading it.
Trooper also gives links to CNBC cancelling its poll when Ron was well ahead, and how the Guardian avoided mentioning him by name.
All small government people should be outraged at the manipulation of the electoral process by media organizations. The manner in which Governor Gary Johnson has been excluded from the process is bizarre and disgusting. It appears that the ‘mainstream’ press are determined to create a contest between Romney and Obama.
The first paragraph of the article quoted below, which disparages a ‘libertarian political party which represents just 12 per cent of voters and barely 0.2 per cent of the eurozone’s voters’ reminds me of the old movie, “The Mouse that roared,” in which a mini principality goes to war with the US and through a series of unlikely events, wins.
The world is becoming used to the daily round of news of European nations in financial crisis, Greece being the current centre of attention. There are constant updates on efforts by the more solvent members of the Euro zone to prop up failing members in exchange for financial reforms. Meanwhile, long-suffering taxpayers are becoming increasingly outraged.
A current effort to expand the European Financial Stability Facility to 440 billion Euros has been blocked temporally by tiny Slovakia. The ruling coalition there failed to approve the measure when the libertarian orientated Freedom and Solidarity (SaS) Party, voted it down. The measure is expected to pass with the support of the opposition, probably requiring an early election as a condition.
“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’- Ronald Reagan
Several days ago here in a post, “Protecting cropping land from mining, and farmers” I mentioned some of the nasties that were included in a Draft State Planning Policy for Strategic Cropping Land. A number of normal farming activities would be removed from local control and be subject to central government decisions.
Dale Stiler from ‘Just Grounds’ has sent in a link, which makes it clear that this is a whole lot more serious than the issues raised before. Now it appears that an incredible number of activities that farmers could be expected to carry out in the pursuit of diversification, will be illegal on land that is designated “Strategic cropping land.”
The National Farmers Federation is skeptical as to the degree of protection afforded, and Carbon Sense Coalition chairman Viv Forbes, has found serious problems in the draught:
Carbon Sense Coalition chairman Viv Forbes said the policy would stop farmers subdividing their land.
“Any other developments on their blighted land will be banned or difficult,” Mr Forbes said. “Imagine the obstacles should they want to develop a racehorse stud, a feedlot, a new house or a private forest?” he said.
“Farmers will be condemned to be pastoral peasants on cropping land controlled forever, paddock by paddock, by an anti-farming, anti-mining bureaucracy. Continue reading
A common practice amongst libertarians is categorization of ourselves into various little factions. Attempts to draw up classification schema of “types of libertarian” are a popular pasttime, and although one may argue this only serves to encourage infighting, it can also be useful for illustrative purposes.
I wish to make my own proposal. At risk of Yet Another Objectivist Cliche, I’m going to indulge in some trichotomic analysis and suggest that libertarians can be divided into three basic kinds.
I am dividing libertarians on the basis of three different broad lines in libertarian argumentation. All three kinds of argument have overlap with each other, so by no means is this system perfect, but I believe it has some use.
In essence, my scheme divides libertarians on the basis of which argument for liberty they most strongly emphasize. Whilst libertarian thought is very diverse and rife with internal disagreements, I think it would be fair to describe it as having three underlying “currents” that dominate the discourse.
Some quotes from the article:
“Internode chief Simon Hackett has revealed to the Financial Review newspaper that he expects the Coalition to win the next Federal election and cancel the National Broadband Network; an event which could potentially result in Internode becoming a public company and rolling out its own fibre infrastructure.”
“If the NBN stops, there are clear avenues to go out and build fibre networks and then the case for listing is much stronger.”
Hopefully once the threat of subsidised government competition goes away, we might actually get efficient cheap fast broadband in Australia that we don’t have to pay both inflated monthly fees and extra tax for.