Another Rothbard classic.

My long term goal is to have ATS and ATS-allied groups operating in cities, towns, counties, and regions all over the USA, and working in tandem to advance ideas like this in their own local areas. The rest of my work is simply about developing an intellectual counter-elite and theoretical foundation for these ideas, developing a workable strategy, cultivating constituents for such a project and developing viable activist endeavors towards such an end.

————————————————————————————————-

From the National Journal.

“The US ruling class has continually drifted leftward over the last century to the point where the “Old Left”, the Marxist/Trotskyist/New Deal intellectual Left of the 1930s, are now the ostensible conservative Republicans while the Marcusean cultural Marxists of the 1960s “New Left” are now the liberal Democrats. If this historical pattern continues, then an on-going leftward drift will mean that within a couple of decades the ostensible “conservatives” or “right-wing” will be the present day reactionary liberalism of Dianne Feinstein, Charles Schumer, Ted Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Albert Gore, John Kerry, Michael Moore and Morris Dees. We can easily envision an ideologically and intellectually decrepit lot such as these presiding over the final days of the crumbling US empire.”

-Keith Preston

———————————————————————————————————————————————-

By Alex Roarty
National Journal

Texas Gov. Rick Perry has taken the Republican presidential field by storm since declaring his candidacy on Saturday, winning widespread praise for his outspoken conservative positions. But Perry has served 26 years since first winning election, as a Democrat, to the Texas state House in 1984. That means he carries a record — a long record — containing a few conservative blemishes that his leading rivals in the GOP field can seize upon.

Indeed, in an interview with a Des Moines radio station on Monday, Perry was deluged with questions from informed Republican voters about potential conservative heresies on his record — from his enthusiastic backing of an unsuccessful superhighway proposal that critics claimed was a land grab, to his support for Al Gore in the 1988 Democratic presidential primary.

Wondering about the playbook of attacks his Republican rivals may be digging from in the coming months? Here’s an overview:

( More … )

Article by Bill Kauffman.

————————————————————————————————————————————————-

In 1969, Norman Mailer, the dukes-up bard of Brooklyn and a self-proclaimed “left conservative,” undertook a campaign for mayor of the city that had, seven decades earlier, swallowed his borough of homes and churches. Competing in the Democratic primary against a quartet of machine hacks and standard-brand liberals, the novelist-pugilist got clobbered. What do you expect of an electorate that has filled Gracie Mansion with the likes of Abe Beame, Ed Koch, and Rudy Giuliani? But Mailer ran a race that carved out a path that we would do well to follow today. I don’t believe that any municipal campaign of the last century has been packed with such radical spirit and reactionary sense.

Mailer averred that he was to the left of the liberals and to the right of the conservatives: wisdom’s place! He diagnosed the modern malady: “The style of New York life has shifted since the Second World War (along with the rest of American cities) from a scene of local neighborhoods and personalities to a large dull impersonal style of life which deadens us with its architecture, its highways, its abstract welfare, and its bureaucratic reflex to look for government solutions which come into the city from without (and do not work). . . . Our authority has been handed over to the federal power. We expect our economic solutions, our habitats, yes, even our entertainments, to derive from that remote abstract power, remote as the other end of a television tube. We are like wards in an orphan asylum. The shaping of the style of our lives is removed from us—we pay for huge military adventures and social experiments so separated from our direct control that we do not even know where to begin to look to criticize the lack of our power to criticize. . . . [O]ur condition is spiritless. We wait for abstract impersonal powers to save us, we despise the abstractness of those powers, we loathe ourselves for our own apathy.” Has any candidate in postwar America been as eloquent? (Mailer’s essay, “An Instrument for the City,” reprinted in Existential Errands, is a brilliant and shamefully neglected decentralist manifesto. If only NYC had listened to Mailer, Paul Goodman, and Dorothy Day instead of John Lindsay, Robert Moses, and the New York Times.)

( More … )

Article by Bill Kauffman.

———————————————————————————————————————————————–

Perhaps no political term is quite so misunderstood as “anarchy.” In the popular press, it is a synonym for disorder and chaos, not to mention looting and pillage: countries like Haiti are always being “plunged into anarchy.” The anarchist, meanwhile, is frozen into a late-nineteenth-century caricature: he is furtive, hirsute, beady-eyed, given to gesticulation, gibberish, and, most of all, pointless acts of violence. Yet anarchy, according to most of its proponents through the years, is peaceable, wholly voluntary, and perhaps a bit utopian. The word means “without a ruler”; anarchy is defined as the absence of a state and its attendant coercive powers. It implies nothing about social arrangements, family and sexual life, or religion; and in fact the most persuasive anarchists, from Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy to Catholic Worker founder Dorothy Day, have been Christians.

Under anarchy, wrote its advocate Prince Peter Kropotkin in the Encyclopedia Britannica(1910), “the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all the fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state in all its functions.” From alms to arms, “an anarchist is a voluntarist,” explained Karl Hess, the speechwriter for Barry Goldwater who chucked it all to live as a husband, neighbor, and welder in rural West Virginia. Anarchists would separate state from church, state from education, state from welfare, even state from justice. (Murray N. Rothbard and David Friedman, among others, have explored how courts and policing might work in a stateless society.)

( More … )

Article by Russell Longcore.

I don’t generally post articles about religion here, as I like to keep religion and politics separate. I also consider the militant atheism of some strands of classical anarchism (and today’s “New Atheists”) as archaic and largely irrelevant to modern societies. I also don’t want religion to be a divisive force in the movement I am trying to develop.

But this piece by a former fundamentalist turned deist is an excellent introduction to the anti-clerical outlook that is a big part of the anarchist tradition. “Unbelievers” are the fastest growing religious perspective in the U.S. today, and religious dissent often correlates with political dissent. Criticizing Christian orthodoxy and embracing alternative religious perspectives like deism and entirely skeptical positions like atheism were an essential and primary part of the cultivation of the intellectual culture of the Enlightenment. It is out of this intellectual milieu that political philosophies of the kind we discuss here emerged: classical liberalism, classical anarchism, libertarian socialism, and modern libertarianism.

————————————————————————————————————————————————–

An undercurrent of comments began after I ran Laurence Vance’s article Are Evangelical Christians Warmongers? One reader calling himself “Anubis” (the jackal-headed Egyptian god) started it by commenting “Another reason I’ve become an atheist. If there was a God he would…”

I took the bait and replied “Being an atheist is unintelligent and flies in the face of reason. Being a-religious makes sense. You can acknowledge God’s existence and have a relationship with Him without embracing any particular religion.”

“Nathan McMurray” added this: “Careful Russ, you don’t know the specifics of why this reader chose atheism over theism. If it was based on “unintelligent” presuppositions then yes, his choice would be unintelligent and, therefore, fly in the face of reason. But there are many of us atheists that have examined the facts of the various Holy Scriptures and found that none of them point to anything that would resemble an all-knowing creator entity; much less an entity that has taken a keen interest in a certain species of upright walking apes and with whom they copulate. At best, all anyone can say with certainty is they are a hopeful agnostic.”

( More … )

Article by Justin Raimondo.

——————————————————————————————————————————————–

In the days before the Empire, generals – particularly Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs – kept their mouths shut. The Founders’ justified fears of military intrusion into the political realm were still present in the American consciousness, and the idea that an American general might try to influence policy directly, by making public statements on controversial political topics, was considered outside the norm. Today, however, no one is shocked by Admiral Mullen’s testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee that we are, for all intents and purposes, already at war with Pakistan:

“Extremist organizations serving as proxies of the government of Pakistan are attacking Afghan troops and civilians as well as U.S. soldiers. For example, we believe the Haqqani Network – which has long enjoyed the support and protection of the Pakistani government and is, in many ways, a strategic arm of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Agency – is responsible for the September 13th attacks against the U.S. Embassy in Kabul.

“There is ample evidence confirming that the Haqqanis were behind the June 28th attack against the Inter-Continental Hotel in Kabul and the September 10th truck bomb attack that killed five Afghans and injured another 96 individuals, 77 of whom were U.S. soldiers. History teaches us that it is difficult to defeat an insurgency when fighters enjoy a sanctuary outside national boundaries, and we are seeing this again today. The Quetta Shura and the Haqqani Network are hampering efforts to improve security in Afghanistan, spoiling possibilities for broader reconciliation, and frustrating U.S.-Pakistan relations. The actions by the Pakistani government to support them – actively and passively – represent a growing problem that is undermining U.S. interests and may violate international norms, potentially warranting sanction. In supporting these groups, the government of Pakistan, particularly the Pakistani Army, continues to jeopardize Pakistan’s opportunity to be a respected and prosperous nation with genuine regional and international influence.”

If the evidence is so “ample,” why didn’t Mullen reveal any of it during the course of his testimony? It’s “classified,” which means we ordinary mortals aren’t entitled to see it: we just have to take their word for it. In this context, however, their word isn’t worth a hill of beans.

( More … )

Article by Kevin Carson.

——————————————————————————————————————————————

With the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the U.S. armed forces ceased at least a major part of their official discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.  Since the Congressional deal last Fall — one of Obama’s promises he actually followed through on — the gay and lesbian community has been counting down the months, days and hours until the repeal took effect.  MSNBC resounded with cries of “Nunc dimittis!”  So I’ll add my own congratulations for the gay service members — I guess.

At first glance, this story would seem like a big win for anyone who hates seeing large, powerful institutions walk all over people’s human dignity and treat them like dirt.  But at second glance, what do you think the state’s armed forces are all about, anyway?

Thanks to this recent blessed occasion, we’ll have the pleasure of knowing the torture at Gitmo — the closing of which is a promise Obama didn’t follow through on — is being conducted by a military that’s integrated not only by race but by sexual orientation.  And the “extraordinary renditions,” the “harsh interrogation techniques” at Baghram AFB, and God knows what at the network of black sites around the world — stuff Obama never even promised to stop — will all be carried out by gays and straights alike.  O happy day!

( More … )

Article by David D’Amato.

———————————————————————————————————————————————–

The fact that “we live in a post-9/11 world” has become a convenient refrain for law enforcement over the past decade — and one that can apparently be called upon to justify limitless growth of the American police state.

This week, reporting on the protests still underway on Wall Street, the New York Times’ Joseph Goldstein noted that the “police’s actions suggested the flip side of a force trained to fight terrorism.” That’s because the NYPD have dealt with demonstrators with all of the characteristic brutality that we’ve come to expect from our cities’ militarized patrols.

A quick search in YouTube is enough to reveal the kinds of excessive, violent tactics that the police have employed, arresting many protestors without cause under the thin pretense of “disorderly conduct.” The story reminds us that today police departments are more often a greater threat to peaceful society than the criminals they ostensibly protect us from.

( More … )

Article by Radley Balko.

———————————————————————————————————————————————

Article by Michael Tracy.

————————————————————————————————————————————————

It’s no secret that Ralph Nader has held the Democratic Party establishment in low regard for decades now: the marginally more palatable alternative in an ugly duopoly, he claims, is still quite ugly. But lately Nader’s disdain has reached a new high. “It’s gotten so bad,” he tells me, “that you can actually say a Republican president—with a Democratic Senate—would produce less bad results than the present situation. That’s how bollixed stuff has gone.”

Not that he was  ever particularly optimistic about the Obama administration, especially its potential to make headway on curtailing corporate welfare, now Nader’s signature policy objective. But in that, as with so many aspects of Obama’s presidency, the adjectives “disappointing” or “inadequate” don’t even begin to capture the depths of progressive disillusionment. Looking ahead to the 2012 presidential race, one might assume that Nader has little to be cheerful about.

Yet he says there is one candidate who sticks out—who even gives him hope: Rep. Ron Paul of Texas.

That might sound counterintuitive. Nader, of course, is known as a stalwart of the independent left, having first gained notoriety for his 1960s campaign to impose greater regulatory requirements on automakers—a policy act that would seem to contravene the libertarian understanding of justified governmental power. So I had to ask: how could he profess hope in Ron Paul, who almost certainly would have opposed the very regulations on which Nader built his career?

( More … )

Article by Matt Welch.

————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Michael Tracey, who wrote about restrictive teen-driving laws in the June issue of Reason, catches up with the consumer crusader for The American Conservative:

Looking ahead to the 2012 presidential race, one might assume that Nader has little to be cheerful about.

Yet he says there is one candidate who sticks out—who even gives him hope: Rep. Ron Paul of Texas. [...]

“Look at the latitude,” Nader says, referring to the potential for cooperation between libertarians and the left. “Military budget, foreign wars, empire, Patriot Act, corporate welfare—for starters. When you add those all up, that’s a foundational convergence. Progressives should do so good.”

I thought I’d bring up the subject of Ron Paul with Nader after seeing the two jointly interviewed on Fox Business Channel in January. Nader had caught me off guard when he identified an emergent left-libertarian alliance as “today’s most exciting new political dynamic.” It was easy to foresee objections that the left might raise: if progressives are in favor of expanding the welfare state, how well can they really get along with folks who go around quoting the likes of Hayek and Rothbard?

“That’s strategic sabotage,” Nader responds, sharply. “It’s an intellectual indulgence….If they’re on your side, and you don’t compromise your positions, what do you care who they quote? Franklin Delano Roosevelt sided with Stalin against Hitler. Not to draw that analogy, I’m just saying—why did he side with Stalin? Because Stalin went along with everything FDR wanted.” [...]

“Libertarians like Ron Paul are on our side on civil liberties. They’re on our side against the military-industrial complex. They’re on our side against Wall Street. They’re on our side for investor rights. That’s a foundational convergence,” he exhorts. “It’s not just itty-bitty stuff.” [...]

There are nascent movements underway to bring disaffected progressives into Ron Paul’s fold. A new organization called Blue Republican, advertised on the Huffington Post and elsewhere, urges Democrats to pledge their support for Paul. While Nader isn’t willing to endorse Paul’s candidacy at this point, during our interview his praise grew increasingly effusive. “Ron Paul has always been anti-corporate, anti-Federal Reserve, anti-big banks, anti-bailouts,” Nader says. “I mean, they view him in the same way they view me on a lot of these issues. Did you see the latest poll? He’s like two points behind Obama.”

Whole thing here, including some interesting Ron Paul quotes about his approach to religion.

Reason on Ralph Nader here, on Ron Paul here.

From CNN.

———————————————————————————————————————————————

Model planes used as attack drones?

(CNN) — A 26-year-old Massachusetts man with a physics degree was arrested and charged Wednesday with plotting an attack on the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol with a remote-controlled model aircraft, authorities said.

Rezwan Ferdaus, a U.S. citizen from Ashland, Massachusetts, planned to use model aircraft filled with C-4 plastic explosives, authorities said.

As a result of an undercover FBI investigation, Ferdaus, who has a physics degree from Northeastern University in Boston, was charged with attempting to provide material support and resources to al Qaeda for attacks on U.S. soldiers overseas, authorities said.

His federal public defender couldn’t be reached immediately for comment.

( More … )

From CNN.

————————————————————————————————————————————————

These items were pulled from 7-Eleven stores in Taiwan after complaints about their resemblance to Adolf Hitler.

From CNN.

————————————————————————————————————————————————

A $64 million runway for no one in Alaska? The route a hovercraft would take between the village of Akutan and the runway on Akun Island. September 28th, 2011 12:56 PM ET   Remember Alaska’s “Bridge to Nowhere,” a $400 million span that was supposed to connect Ketchikan to its airport on sparsely inhabited Gravina Island? The project gained infamy in 2005 as a waste of taxpayer dollars and the funds earmarked for it were withheld. The 8,000 residents of Ketchikan continue to be connected to their airport by ferry. Fast forward six years and another remote Alaskan airport project is raising questions about how the government spends money. The price this time is $77 million and the place is Akutan, a remote island village in the Aleutian chain, according to a report from the Alaska Dispatch. By next winter Akutan is scheduled to have a 4,500-foot-long runway, built at a cost of $64 million ($59 million in federal and $5 million state funds), the Dispatch reports. The problem is, the runway is on Akun Island, 6 miles from the village across the treacherous waters of the Bering Sea. Plying those waters can be tricky with seas over 6 feet and winds above 30 mph. Original plans called for using a hovercraft – at a cost of $11 million – to ferry passengers from Akutan to Akun. But, the Dispatch points out, the same model hovercraft planned for the route has proven unreliable under similar conditions elsewhere in Alaska. And when it did run, operating losses were in the millions. Now, transportation officials are considering using a helicopter to ferry passengers from Akutan, according to the Dispatch report. Cost of that is still being determined. Should officials get it all figured out and funded, who’ll benefit? Akutan has a year-round population of 100, but that spikes to about 1,000 in the summer when Trident Seafoods processing plant, the largest seafood processing plant in North America, is in operation, the Dispatch reports. Trident is contributing $1 million to the project, the Dispatch says. And why is this necessary? Air service to Akutan is now provided by World War II-era amphibious aircraft operated by Peninsula Airways. Those are becoming increasingly difficult to maintain, Peninsula Vice President Brian Carricaburu told the Dispatch. Carricaburu also says the runway could cut the government’s costs in one way. Peninsula Airways routes to Akutan are now subsidized by about $700,000 annually under the federal Essential Air Service program. Using bigger, more efficient aircraft could bring that cost down, he told the Dispatch. But to reach that point, it looks like a lot of figurative bridges have to be crossed.

From CNN.

————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Anthony Mangione faces three charges related to child pornography, the Justice Department says.

Miami (CNN) — The head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement for South Florida has been arrested on child pornography charges, the Department of Justice said Wednesday.

Anthony Mangione, 50, of Parkland, Florida, was charged in a three-count indictment unsealed Wednesday with transportation of child pornography, receipt of child pornography and possession of child pornography, authorities said in a statement.

“According to the indictment, between March 2010 and September 2010, Mangione allegedly transported and received visual depictions of minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct,” the statement said. “The indictment also alleges that Mangione possessed electronically stored messages that contained additional images of child pornography during the same time period.”

Mangione was arrested Tuesday by FBI agents and made an initial appearance Wednesday in federal court in West Palm Beach, Florida.

( More … )

Anarchy 101

Baker releases “The End of Loser Liberalism.” Deals with the same issues as his classic, “The Conservative Nanny State.”

Progressives need a fundamentally new approach to politics. They have been losing not just because conservatives have so much more money and power, but also because they have accepted the conservatives’ framing of political debates. They have accepted a framing where conservatives want market outcomes whereas liberals want the government to intervene to bring about outcomes that they consider fair.

This is not true. Conservatives rely on the government all the time, most importantly in structuring the market in ways that ensure that income flows upwards. The framing that conservatives like the market while liberals like the government puts liberals in the position of seeming to want to tax the winners to help the losers.

This “loser liberalism” is bad policy and horrible politics. Progressives would be better off fighting battles over the structure of markets so that they don’t redistribute income upward. This book describes some of the key areas where progressives can focus their efforts in restructuring market so that more income flows to the bulk of the working population rather than just a small elite.

By releasing The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive under a Creative Commons license and as a free download, Baker walks the walk of one of his key arguments — that copyrights are a form of government intervention in markets that leads to enormous inefficiency, in addition to redistributing income upward. (Hard copies are available for purchase, at cost) Distributing the book for free not only enables it to reach a wider audience, but Baker hopes to drive home one of the book’s main points via his own example. While the e-book is free, donations to the Center for Economic and Policy Research are welcomed.

The Altucher Confidential
By James Altucher

(she's $300,000 in debt).

Time to end the FDA, traditional medical education and the insurance companies. Just get rid of them.

Let’s start with the worst and most corrupt semi-government institution known to mankind: the Food and Drug Administration. The administration that lets you smoke as many cigarettes as you need to get lung cancer, drink a ton of alcohol to get liver cancer, but then won’t let you take any of the drugs or treatments for lung cancer or liver cancer.

I have to tell you something: almost every cancer has been cured already. But let’s say I’m a scientist with a bad personality (I’ve been accused of being a bad scientist with a congenial personality but never the former). Let’s also assume I’ve developed a drug that will cure your liver cancer without chemo. Now what do I do?

Here’s the four steps I would CURRENTLY have to do:

A) It costs a billion dollars to get a drug through the Food And Drug Administration. This is why I mention the bad personality part. There’s zero chance I’m going to raise this money. Instead, because my personality is so bad I have no friends at the various research magazines so I’ll never get my findings published and consequently I’m going to get fired before I get tenure and I’m going to end up as a cashier at Walmart. What sort of tests do I need to do? I have to round up potentially thousands of people to take my drug, take placebos, check for safety, effectiveness, blah blah blah. It takes ten years to do this so potentially valuable drugs stay out of the hands of patients who will most assuredly die in this time.

B) At any one of these four steps, judges at the FDA can decide if I passed or failed my trial. These judges are often people who have worked at my competitors or who want to work at my competitors, making it extra hard to get through the implicit corruption that surrounds the FDA.

C) Now I have to convince the insurance companies to pay for my medicine so patients don’t have to pay the full cost. Because I just spent a billion dollars on approving my medicine (over a TEN YEAR period on average) the medicine is VERY expensive so I can make back the cost. Insurance companies don’t want to pay for my medicine. They don’t want to pay for any medicine really. So this is a hard process. And I have to raise another $50 million to survive long enough to hire people who will convince all the insurance companies to accept my drug.

D) Finally, I have to educate doctors that my drug will cure liver cancer. Doctors could care less about me. They are going on cruises funded by the big pharma companies (who just finished spending billions on their drug trials) and the big insurance companies where they are told what billion dollar drugs to recommend to their patients. They aren’t going to listen to me.

So basically, if I have the cure for liver cancer, nobody is going to ever find out. It’s like a five year old with the talent of Mozart who never touches the piano. Nobody will ever know. I’ll give up in the laboratory before I even tell anyone. The best doctors do, in fact, educate themselves and illegally prescribe “orphan drugs”: Drugs that might have been approved for kidney cancer but NOT approved for liver cancer and will recommend those drugs for liver cancer. But most doctors will not do that because it’s technically illegal..And certainly no doctor will recommend a drug that has NOT been approved by both the FDA and the insurance companies.

Wow, you might think. This is a disaster. Will Obamacare help? Will anything help?

And the answer is “Yes”. Here’s the very simple solution:

A) Get rid of the FDA. Simple. Let the Internet be a virtual FDA. A drug will have a web page, a scientist with verified credentials will document his research, and comments from users will describe their experiene with a drug. Many people die and get sick from FDA-APPROVED(!) drugs. The same thing will happen here. But will save the billion dollars and will allow drugs to be quickly tested by the audience that needs it most – people dying of terminal diseases. These people will quickly report back if there is success and we’ll know what works and what doesn’t. If there are bad stories then it’s a guarantee we will hear about them. And it won’t require a billion dollars and ten years to hear about them.

Well, what about the rest of the FDA? Oh, you mean the part that puts labels on cigarettes and allows hot dogs (also related to intestinal cancers) to be colored red? You can get rid of them also. They cause more cancers than they cure anyway.

(this is APPROVED by the FDA)

But don’t they fight drugs? Uhhh….Good luck with that.

What’s the net outcome of having zero FDA?

The cost of drugs will go down from $600 for a month’s use to $10. And drugs that actually cure things (instead of drugs that had the personalities behind them to raise a billion) will actually make it to market. The net result: more people will live longer. And drug research will be infinitely more productive.

B) Get rid of 90% of insurance companies. Once drug treatment costs go down to zero and there’s more competition among drugs (because more drugs are available) then why do you need to insure for them? I still might want to insure for things like long-term disability or life insurance but almost all medical insurance will be eliminated. Why is this a good thing? Because medical insurance, which claims to help you, is actually on the other side of the table from you – they will try to deny that you have an illness, or they will try to limit the amount of treatment you get- simply because they don’t want to pay for it. So they are not your friend. As I mentioned in my post “How to Deal With Crappy People” – stop hanging out with the people who are not your friends.

C) Get rid of Medical Education. Doctors graduate with $300,000 in debt often. So they have to make it up by recommending every treatment possible to you and charging as much as possible so they can pay back their loans. This is not in your favor. Almost everything I can learn in an expensive medical school I can learn with a combination of Passion + Internet + Apprenticeship.

So if someone truly wants to help people and be a “MEDICAL DOCTOR” here’s what I recommend: the following three (or four) step medical education:

(I can totally do this)

1) At the age of18, spend a year changing bedpans at a hospital and let’s see if you truly have the passion AND compassion to be a medical doctor (most don’t have either but by the time they finish their $300,000 in debt education they are forced to continue in order to pay back their loans and to justify the 12 year time invested).

2) Spend a year where you pay a GP (or whatever field you want to go in) to be their intern. This should cost you about $20,000.

3) Spend a year as an apprentice for the same GP but charge a lower rate to patients.

4) If you want to be a surgeon, go to a 1-2 year “surgeon school”

5) A yelp-like system should be created to review both drugs and doctors. Yelp has proven to be extremely efficient for ranking the most important aspect of our society – our culinary tastes. Why not use it for other important things. Like where and how we get treated for illness.

Now you’re an MD. At theage of 20 or 22. Not 32.

Net result of all of this:

A) Cheaper and more drugs

B) More diseases cured

C) Bigger community discussing the diseases and various treatments. This is what social media is for. It should be transformative of the medical industry.

D) More doctors.

E) Less expenses all around for the patient

F) More medical facilities around the country

G) Less corrupt influence of the big insurance and pharma companies

H) Less government expense by eliminating the FDA.

You can argue, “But more people will die from bad drugs.” Many many more people will be saved also. And once a drug is truly discovered (and this will happen much faster in my system) to cure liver cancer then that drug will quickly rise to the top in the yelp-system and everyone will begin using it and all the people with liver cancer will be saved. Let’s not forget, the FDA recalls as many drugs as it approves. How come? Because the real world is different from a laboratory. And once a drug is approved it often is shown to have harmful effects when it’s prescribed. So then it’s recalled, showing once again the FDA does nothing useful but cost people money.

On top of all of this, my system will create many more doctors with much more compassion. And if they want to suddenly change jobs, then let them. They haven’t invested 12 years and$300,000 to be a doctor. But that’s ok, because there’s many people lining up to replace them.

What about all the jobs lost at the insurance companies and the FDA? Well, maybe they should become doctors and help people instead of hurt them!

So, for anyone needing a pap smear, or a check of their tonsils, or having problems with depression or post-traumatic stock market stress, give me a holler. Office hours are open.

—

Please FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER

And you can buy my book: I WAS BLIND BUT NOW I SEE

Leave it to a far left Black radical group to come up with a far more libertarian position than a large number of so-called libertarians.

I have a concrete plan for how public education in Philadelphia will be run and funded. This plan will ensure success and prosperity for our school system, no matter who its superintendent it is, as the real basis of leadership will come from the community and the basis of development will be driven by the community.

I strongly believe that the budget cuts are just half of the problem. Even under full funding we saw how Ackerman’s budget allocation was not serving the interests of the students. Therefore, while I state my commitment to struggle against the budget cuts with all of my might I also call for:

a. A Community-Controlled Board of Education with power to hire and fire faculty, staff and administration and determine the quality of the curriculum.

b. Economic Development: The education system itself must serve as a tool to revitalize Philly’s economy through providing economic programs to be carried out by the students who will receive training in the process. Such programs will include an urban agriculture program and other vocational training in construction, plumbing, mechanics etc.

c. The Community-Controlled Board of Education will oversee the launch of a bond issue. They will oversee the management and distribution of these securities. The board issues bonds and everybody who is interested in investing in public school education can buy the bonds. They will become a bondholder. The Community-Controlled Board of Education runs the school district.

Article by Stuart Bramhall.

———————————————————————————————————————

Banned in the US

Film Review

The War You Don’t See

Produced and directed by John Pilger

Americans now have the opportunity of seeing John Pilger’s critically acclaimed The War You Don’t See as a free download at http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/war-you-dont-see/ The groundbreaking documentary was effectively banned in the US when Patrick Lannan, who funds the “liberal” Lannon Foundation, canceled the American premier (and all Pilger’s public appearances) in June 2010. Pilger provides the full background of this blatant act of censorship at his website www.johnpilger.com. After seeing the film, I believe its strong support of Julian Assange (who the US Department of Justice is attempting to prosecute) is the most likely reason it’s not being shown in American theatres.

Pilger’s documentary centers around the clear propaganda role both the British and US press played in cheerleading the US/British invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. It includes a series of interviews in which Pilger confronts British and American journalists (including Dan Rather) and news executives regarding their failure to give air time to weapons inspectors and military/intelligence analysts who were publicly challenging the justification for these invasions. The Australian filmmaker focuses heavily on the fabricated evidence (Saddam Hussein’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction and links to 9-11) that was used to convince American and British lawmakers to go along with an illegal attack on a defenceless nation (Iraq).

( More … )

lol

On zoning’s effect on property values. The author, Charlie Gardner, has this to say in the comments:

Without zoning, things actually worked out quite well. Industry located in land it valued highly but which was shunned by residential (along train tracks and at city fringes where land was cheap). Commercial located in space that was valuable for its purposes (first floors, for visibility and accessibility) while residential took the above floors (for privacy and security). No one was consciously trying to make things “mixed-use.” The idea that chaos would ensue if zoning were abolished flourishes in the absence of critical thinking about urban economics and urban history. (I’d also add that there’s no logical reason that zoning has to cover everything. It’s not all or nothing. If there is lingering concern about industry, why not just create one area for industry and leave the rest alone? That is what Paris seems to do, based on the essay I posed a couple weeks back.)

———————-
Old Urbanist
Charlie Gardner

At the new website The Atlantic Cities, Ryan Avent has published an adapted portion of his new book in which he makes a common sense, but infrequently raised, observation about the economic effects of zoning laws:

Hear, hear! Article by Simon Jenkins.

——————————————————————————————————————————————