Jefferson: He liked France, but he didn’t LOVE France like Franklin.
Back in March, my wife and I took a trip to England. We saw the sites, did the tourist thing, watched a soccerfootball local sporting event. Something odd came up a week prior—a friend of mine just happened to be in Paris that weekend. Side trip! One thing I learned from the people I sat next to on the Eurostar to Paris, it doesn’t matter what country you are in, people bitch about the same stuff at work. Also, since it was snowing, no matter what country you are in people will irritate me by bitching about the cold. I’m from Arizona, if I can handle a little snow without complaining, what does that say about you?
This is my review of Kronenbourg 1664.
This is also my review of Kronenbourg 1664.
I thought I would find out if a beer was different here vs. across the pond. So I bought three cans on the train with the intent of smuggling one of them back home. Cost for three 500mL cans: about €11. But why Kronenbourg? Honestly, it was the only one available at the time I thought of it that was sold on both continents. Once I got home I picked up a six pack from a local Kroger. Cost: about $8.
Here’s the problem, when I decided to finally drink it I found out what was available at my local grocer was imported directly from France, rather than a contract brewer located somewhere in North America.
Edinburg, that’s in still in Scotland, right?
To make matters worse, the can I stuffed in my checked bag at Heathrow was actually brewed by a contract brewer in Scotland. Which gives me the further impression that not only does the Auld Alliance still live[!], the modern Scottish economy is mostly booze, and [fucking] sheep related.
Incidentally this 500mL can is 2.5 out if the 4 daily units of alcohol recommended by the British government. Which is a shame, given the amount of alcohol available over there. Not as shameful as the beer; this is rather forgettable. Neither is one I would recommend when others are available, but for purposes of consistency: Kronenbourg 1664 2.5/5.
Due to this disappointment I went and found another to feature. This one is from Grand Canyon Brewery in Williams, AZ which for the observant among you will recall the last time I raised awareness for the Glibertarian Beer it Forward.
This one uses the same schtick as the bock with the bag of wood chips in the bottle to add notes of fresh cut oak but also raw coffee beans. I was much happier with this one. Grand Canyon Coffee Bean Stout: 3.5/5.
Having returned from my New England sojourn, I am prepared to bring you the best, most interesting, and most compelling links to the most important news stories of the day. This will allow you the opportunity to post recycled outrage stories, titty pix, and endless discussions of Eurotrash “sports.” My return was not without some unwanted adventure. As I feared, SP’s babysitter was a wee bit too indulgent, though I admit that she’s easy to spoil. The photo above is what I returned to find, and lesson learned- leaving the babysitter with one of my credit cards for emergency use is not without risk.
In history, today is the birthday of the great actor Lionel Barrymore and the remarkably pretentious chef Alice Waters. Also, Ann-Margaret, Marcia Strassman, and my mother, who will celebrate the day with Publix roast chicken on the menu. Anyway, an interesting news day.
Not good news for me, and that explains why responses to my videos are down sharply. I’m setting up a work-around, though.
Every once in a while, I’m proud of my erstwhile home city. I do enjoy how sports figures don’t even blink when they defend free speech by other players, but oppose it by the people who pay the money that pays their enormous salaries.
And now, more Old Guy music for y’all to ignore. In this instance, the greatest (and I would argue, the most quintessentially American) composer and band leader with my favorite male vocalist, who headed jazz towards a much more R&B sound and could arguably be called the father of that genre. Fun fact: Al Hibbler couldn’t read music. Of course, being blind was an impediment to that… There’s no credits, but I’ll bet that the sax solo was Johnny Hodges.
Duck Butter’s Naima (Alia Shawkat) and Sergio (Laia Costa) fuck like the world is ending. They do it at Sergio’s house, they do it at Naima’s house, they do it outside within potential view of strangers. They finger bang on a piano bench and kiss in between slurps of mango. They recreate Sergio’s experience of learning to masturbate with pillows alongside her cousin. They enjoy a salutary fuck, and they engage in makeup sex.
After a stretch, Naima notes, “You know, we haven’t had sex in two hours.” She says this gravely, as if confronting Sergio with a rupture in their relationship. At this point, it’s been less than 36 hours since they made each other’s acquaintance.
In a step that could change the definition of death, researchers have restored circulation to the brains of decapitated pigs and kept the reanimated organs alive for as long as 36 hours.
The feat offers scientists a new way to study intact brains in the lab in stunning detail. But it also inaugurates a bizarre new possibility in life extension, should human brains ever be kept on life support outside the body.
The work was described on March 28 at a meeting held at the National Institutes of Health to investigate ethical issues arising as US neuroscience centers explore the limits of brain science.
During the event, Yale University neuroscientist Nenad Sestan disclosed that a team he leads had experimented on between 100 and 200 pig brains obtained from a slaughterhouse, restoring their circulation using a system of pumps, heaters, and bags of artificial blood warmed to body temperature.
There was no evidence that the disembodied pig brains regained consciousness. However, in what Sestan termed a “mind-boggling” and “unexpected” result, billions of individual cells in the brains were found to be healthy and capable of normal activity.
LONDON — The anti-vaccine movement has come for the pets.
A spreading fear of pet vaccines’ side effects has prompted the British Veterinary Association to issue a startling statement this week: Dogs cannot develop autism.
The implicit message was that dog owners should keep vaccinating their pets against diseases like distemper and canine hepatitis because any concerns that the animals would develop autism after the injections were unfounded.
…
Those who fear vaccine side effects in their dogs claim the animals could develop canine autism, thyroid disease and arthritis.
Then, on Monday, the television show “Good Morning Britain” on ITV put out a call on Twitter to hear from dog owners who believed their pets showed symptoms of autism after receiving vaccinations, and from others who had stopped getting their pets vaccinated against dangerous diseases.
The next day, the veterinary association put out a statement on Twitter.
“We are aware of an increase in anti-vaccination pet owners in the U.S. who have voiced concerns that vaccinations may lead to their dogs developing autism-like behavior. There’s currently no reliable scientific evidence to indicate autism in dogs (or its link to vaccines),” the association said in its tweet.
A group of students and researchers at Delft University of Technology are designing a starship capable of keeping generations of crew alive as they cross the gulf between stars – and they’ve turned to ESA for the starship’s life support.
DSTART, the TU Delft Starship Team, is bringing together a wide variety of disciplines to perform advanced concepts research for a resilient interstellar space vehicle, to be constructed from a hollowed-out asteroid. The aim is not just to focus on the necessary technology, but also to consider the biological and social factors involved in making such a gargantuan voyage feasible.
“We need self-sustaining and evolvable space technology capable of enduring the many decades needed to journey from our Solar System to another,” explains DSTART leader Angelo Vermeulen, currently studying for his systems engineering Ph.D. at TU Delft.
“As part of that, we are looking at the kind of regenerative life-support system pioneered by the ESA-led MELiSSA (Micro-Ecological Life Support System Alternative) programme.”
The 11-nation MELiSSA programme seeks to build a system, inspired by a natural aquatic ecosystem, to efficiently convert organic waste and carbon dioxide into oxygen, water and food.
A MELiSSA pilot plant in Spain’s Autonomous University of Barcelona hosts an airtight multi-compartment loop with a ‘bioreactor’ powered by light and oxygen-producing algae to keep ‘crews’ of rats alive and comfortable for months at a time. While the algae yield oxygen and trap carbon dioxide, the rats do exactly the reverse.
Reading two very different books at the moment, but that’s really not unusual for me as I generally read constantly.
First, I’m dipping into Waking Up by Sam Harris. I’ve practiced meditation on and off for most of my adult life; currently in “off” mode. However, I’ve long acknowledged that during “on” periods, I seem to be much more resilient regarding the regular buffeting that life hands me. I simply lack the discipline necessary to always maintain a practice. Various things crop up that derail the habit, and it takes me a while to get back to it. I’m hoping that this book gives me a nudge to begin again. One day will simply lead to the next, and so on, and I’ll be back to a better practice and, perhaps, sort out some things that have been on my mind lately.
I’m currently reading two books as well, also very different from each other.
The first is When: The Science of Perfect Timing by Daniel Pink. This is very much as is described in the title: all about why the timing of something matters as much — and sometimes more — than the thing itself. Pink discusses how people’s biorhythms make them more prone to mistakes at different parts of the day, and how it’s important to align the task you’re doing with your own natural rhythm. The book starts off with the suggestion that maybe the Lusitania sunk because it was early afternoon — typically a time when most people make mistakes — and the Captain made a series of bad judgement calls. I find this book very interesting.
The first book in the trilogy isn’t perfect, seemingly to only half-heartedly commit to its attempt to blend the history of Red China’s SETI program, the Cultural Revolution and a modern-day mystery of wide-spread suicides among physicists which are somehow connected to an underground VR game called The Three-Body Problem. The early parts of the book, set around the Cultural Revolution and the SETI program are very engaging, but the long sequences of the main character playing the VR game–with its grounding in higher mathematics and Chinese historio-mythologue–is less so. And when the reveal comes to tie it all together, it creates severe fictional whiplash.
I was left with a real sense of “Where the hell does he go after this?” And after Liu showed me in the sequel, The Dark Forest, I was left asking “Where the hell does he go after this?” And after Liu showed me in the final book, Death’s End, all I could think was “How in the hell are they going to make this in a TV show?”
There are few science fiction books that surprise me, and even fewer that don’t turn that surprise into disappointment. Liu Cixin didn’t disappoint me but these books are not an easy read.
Riven
The bad news is: I did not pass the exam on April 3rd. The good news is: I get to take it again on May 7th. … Yay. So, I’ve still been reading this lovely book, taking practice exams, etc. It’s been a very exciting few months. I’m looking forward to reading literally anything else after this is all over. … But mostly I’m looking forward to quality time with Persona 5, which Mr. Riven purchased for me for my birthday based on how much I loved Catherine. Since I can’t recommend you pick up the book I’m buried in, I will recommend you purchase either of these fine video games, instead.
jesse.in.mb
Al Qaeda’s Super Secret Weapon – a VERY tongue in cheek take on the end of DADT in short graphic novel form. I laughed until my sides ached. There’s an almost poignent discussion of the IDF and why threesomes seem like a good idea but aren’t somewhere in the middle, and a pointed criticism of the Dallas airport. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
An Irish Country Cookbook, Patrick Taylor – I didn’t realize when I picked it up that it was a tie-in to a book series. I’ve queued up a few of the recipes and the short stories interwoven into the book almost make me want to start reading Taylor’s Irish Country Doctor series.
I’ve completely failed to put down Jia Pingwa’s Happy Dreams, which is both fascinating and infuriating, which is why I’m light on the reading this month.
Old Man With Candy
Two fun books, with a couple from SugarFree queued up for next month. First a reread of something I picked up a couple years ago and loved the hell out of, Bad Science: The Short Life and Weird Times of Cold Fusion, detailing what (to me) was the most interesting scientific fiasco of my lifetime. I may be somewhat biased because I know (or knew) about three quarters of the people talked about in the book, but it really is a delightful look at the use and abuse of science, the wonderful self-correcting nature of the process, the socio-religious tensions in the Salt Lake City-Provo axis, and the carnivorous world of academia. It does make me grateful that I’ve made a science career in industry instead…
The polar opposite is an intimidatingly thick romance novel, The Proviso: Director’s Cut, by the Glibertarians’ own Moriah Jovan (mojeaux). I’m not much on the romance novel genre, but couldn’t resist this one. It’s set in a corporate cut-throat environment, and brings together fatal attraction, ultra-violence, Mormonism (I’m sensing a theme in my books this month), sex, and libertarian sensibilities. The personalities of the characters are very three dimensional and the storyline is compelling. I’m halfway through and greatly enjoying this exploration outside of my reading comfort zone. The scene in the prosecutor’s office will sound disturbingly familiar:
“We don’t help people here. We find excuses to put them in jail and take their stuff… That means we’re the bad guys. Power hungry, abusive of the office, contemptuous of the law, in bed with all the wrong people, completely uninterested in justice,and to top it off, we’re a bunch of thieving bastards… And if you think any other prosecutor’s office is any different, think again.”
JW
I haven’t been eating at home much recently, so I’ve run out of cereal boxes to read. But the really cool thing is that at my favorite restaurant, they have special placemats! So instead of me telling you about what I’ve been reading, I’ll show you!
It’s cool because it’s interactive.
SP’s Dog
Swiss came to visit me. Swiss brought me a whole pizza. Just for me. I didn’t share. I love Swiss. Swiss is my favorite forever. Bacon Magic didn’t bring me pizza. I bark and growl at Bacon Magic.
I am reading the latest Mark Lawrence book, Grey Sister, second installment in his newest series. Honestly, I’ll probably take a break and re-read the first one as I can’t track the characters.
I also read The Great Passage, a surprisingly entertaining book (set in Japan and translated from the original Japanese) about a young, uh, “focused” man who becomes the center of a fifteen year effort to create a new dictionary. I really don’t know how to describe it beyond that. But a really good novel about a couple of awkward people who fall in love with dictionaries and lexicography from a passionate desire to communicate better.
I also read the Riyria Revelations trilogy since last I made a WAWR post. A fun “let’s go overthrow the empire” adventure by two thieves who turn out to be principled killers instead of just thugs. Fast-paced, entertaining, good plot twists. A little too reliant on deus ex machina but a good sword-and-sorcery yarn that doesn’t take itself too seriously.
“This has nothing to do with bananas! Believe me, I’ve checked!”
Are you confused by the supreme law of the land? Did your high school’s civic classes leave you with a clammy feeling on your buttocks and nothing else? Does Judge Andrew Napolitano have a patent on articles consistent entirely of questions?
Don’t worry, your friendly neighborhood immigrant is here to help you figure this stuff out. This isn’t legal advice, I’m not a lawyer, and this is simply my plain English reading of the founding documents of this great country.
With that out of the way, let’s get to the subject at hand. How does the United States Constitution actually work, and in particular, the Bill of Rights? Most people seem to have a very vague understanding of this; they think that it mainly lists their rights and a few other things, like how elections are done, how the justice system works, and that it prescribes the structure of the three branches of the Federal Government. But beyond that they don’t really know or care about the specifics – that’s for experts to know and deal with, amirite?
Sure, you know much more than most people about this subject, but a few things might still surprise you, and maybe you need a refresher, or a way to convince those you love and care about to truly understand it as well?
So in a nutshell, the U.S. Constitution is written by the people of the United States of America, and it originally was intended to create the structure of the Federal Government and grant it certain powers. Those powers are therefore granted by the people to the government. This is an important distinction that most people in my experience have backwards – they think the Constitution is the government’s way to grant rights to the people, and that they can be arbitrarily re-interpreted and restricted based on need.
Seen in this new (to some) light, it becomes obvious that this document is mostly a white-list of things the Federal Government and states (more on this later) can do. That is, anything not specifically mentioned as a power is simply out of bounds. I won’t go into the specific powers listed, just mention that they are quite limited, and that most lawmaking was thought best left to the states and other local governments.
The part of the Constitution that most people know and love is the Bill of Rights. They will enthusiastically point out that they have a certain right because it’s mentioned here. They also attempt to limit rights they don’t agree with by interpreting the text in certain ways, or by showing that a right isn’t explicitly mentioned. But what if I claimed that these initial amendments actually really do nothing at all? That they are just a list of examples of rights that you have regardless of their mention or not. Almost anyone I have talked to about this has balked at the idea, but I think it’s the only way to truly read and understand the Bill of Rights. I’ll explain why.
The Bill of Rights consist of amendments to the original Constitution. It was effectively an afterthought, based on a reasonable fear that people would have a hard time understanding that rights existed by omission, rather than inclusion. In hindsight this was spot on. Today most people consider this afterthought to the Constitution one of its most important features, mainly because we are so much better at dealing with, and understanding specifics rather than those things not mentioned.
The Founding Fathers were inspired by Enlightenment Philosophy. They were Enlightenment philosophers themselves, and arguably contributed as much as they borrowed. One of the ideas that define this philosophical movement is the notion that we are all born with certain rights, and that these rights come from simply existing, not because someone else gave them to us. Today people are in the habit of claiming anything they want as a “right”, but to Enlightenment philosophers, rights were a definable spectrum of what we today call negative rights.
It’s therefore obvious to me that every time the word “right” is used by a Founding Father, that it really means“negative right”, such as in this famous passage from the Declaration of Independence:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
This is essentially the prologue to American history, everything that followed was based on this idea, and the sense that it had somehow been violated by Britain. It eloquently describes the two concerns discussed above; that rights are inherent and not limited to specific ones.
This is echoed in the Bill of Rights, or rather the pre-amble to it, as well as the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. These pieces of text bookends the Bill of Rights and adds necessary context to the rights that are listed.
From the pre-amble:
“THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution”
The “declaratory and restrictive clauses” are the First through Eight Amendments.
The Bill of Rights conclude with the very simple Ninth Amendment:
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
And further expands on it in the Tenth Amendment:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
The cautious concern expressed in these three clauses is almost palpable, and in historical hindsight, completely justified. Clearly there was some worry that rights by omission was just not enough, but also that it was necessary to point out that the Bill of Rights is not the origin of your rights, or the only rights you have.
So what does this mean in practice? Let’s use the Second Amendment as an example, as it has popularly been both misconstrued as limiting your right to keep and bear arms, or as the originator of this right. It states:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Eggheads and regular Americans alike have been pointlessly dithering over the meaning of this sentence for a long time. Each trying to use it as justification for their desired outcome. The various claims are that it only applies to the militia, or that it justifies regulation, or that it applies to everyone because that’s who the “militia” is, or what the meaning of “arms” is in this context. The real truth is that none of this matters. It’s an affirmation of a negative right. Even if the Framers only intended this to cover the militia, it still doesn’t overrule your negative right to keep and bear arms. That exists separate from this sentence, which was tacked onto the Constitution by a bunch of worried gun nuts in the late seventeen hundreds. You can repeal this amendment, and it still would not change a single thing.
The only way to curb this right is for people to willingly give it up by rewriting the Constitution with an amendment to grant government the power to regulate arms.
“A-ha!” you say, “but what about laws at the state level?”
This would have been a somewhat valid argument until July 9th, 1868, where the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted. At least if you have a hard time reading the Ninth Amendment, which to me seems nearly indecipherable to most people, including jurists. In any case the Fourteenth Amendment hammers it home, and the most important passage in this amendment for our context is this:
“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
This has been understood to limit the states, and not just the Federal Government to the legislative powers laid out in the Constitution. It was really written because the states were being willfully stupid when it came to enforcing those pesky negative rights for slaves.
At least one amendment has been added based on the clear understanding that legislative powers have to be granted via the Constitution – not only to Congress but also to the states, after the Fourteenth Amendment. And I think this fact lends some credibility to the idea that the Constitution has been understood in the way outlined above for most of its history, until just very recently.
Which amendment is that? The Eighteenth. Pay particular attention to Section 2:
“Section 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all the territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.
Section 2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.”
This was of course one of the silliest mistakes in American history, but at least it was implemented in a legal way, in accordance with the Constitution.
So if banning alcohol at both the Federal and state level required an amendment to the Constitution, why is the same not true for regulating guns, drugs, and rock’n’roll? Do you even logic, bro?
And no, Judge Napolitano does not have a patent on articles consisting entirely of questions. Or does he?
Howdy y’all, back in the land of sunshine and meth from the Mitten. I’m grateful to everyone else who took a turn this week. It did not escape my notice that certain commenters here have taken a liking to some of the alternate link forms. Me too. But I’m the plain vanilla that makes all the exotic flavors so fun, so you gets what you gets. In SPORTZBALL news, the Astros finally stole a home game from the Angels, who are tearing it up away from Los Anaheim, and special thanks to the Maple Leafs for beating up Boston and then rolling over. My local frozen pond team appreciates it. Will the Caps lay down for the Pens again? Odds are good.
Lets do some links!
Bill Cosby – Convict
It looks like Bill Cosby’s luck has run out. I think he should get a tie-breaker trial. Wait. Is that not how that works?
Looks like OMWC’s swimmers are finally starting to slow. Number of pre-teen moms at record low in the US. Either that or uncles in the Ozarks are really getting slow.
In today’s court or BDSM sweepstakes, former hottest judge on the bench appoints “special master” to review Cohen files for attorney-client privilege. Which, totally sexist since the master is a madam. We’ll see what happens, but its nice see at least a fig-leaf given to the idea that the 4A means what it says.
For those of you of an AnCap mindset, this article is probably not of much benefit. But for those of us that think a minarchy is necessary (and sufficient), the discussion of how to fund a micro-state is of more interest.
Also, yes, this will be, in large part, a discussion of the Single Land Tax (SLT.) This is not the article on the SLT that I promised a year ago, but this is the one you are going to get. At least for now.
Recent discussions of the SLT have got me thinking in different ways and led me to what I needed to do. it’s the answer to almost every problem: DO THE MATH
The Auction
I. Let us start with the premise of this thought experiment. A group of libertarians discovers a previous unfound island or planet or whatever. Either way, whether on sea or through space, I am pretty sure the ship is named Der Sausagefest. This land is entirely undeveloped. Their established minarchy will never spend any money it does not already have in its coffers. The land needs to be divided in a just manner. So they decide: We will divide the land into parcels and auction off the parcels. However, the auction won’t be for the price of land, the bidding will be the amount of land tax you (or any future owners) are committing to pay on the parcel each year going forward for all eternity. The land itself will be free, and come with complete property rights, except for being encumbered with the tax.
There shall be one exception to the eternal nature of the tax: if the owner wishes to, he may forfeit the property back to the state for re-auctioning. He may decide the tax is too damn high and try to “buy” It back at a lower tax. Or he may just decide he doesn’t want it. Whatever.
The libertopian state will have a fixed income based on the initial auction. As it is sensible, the currency will be something like gold that is stable over the long term and so inflation won’t be a problem.
II. Why an auction for the tax amount instead of selling the land? Technically, they are the same thing. The price you would pay is equal to the present value of the future cash flows of the property. And the same for the tax stream, the amount you are willing to bid is a stream with the same present value. But I can think of 3 reasons that the tax is better than an upfront cost:
1. I don’t trust any state, even libertopia, with a large sum of money. Better to give them an annual income than a lump sum.
2. While the state could turn around and invest the money, generating the same income stream as the tax, that involves the state choosing investments. We have seen how well that kind of thing works with CalPERS, for example. We don’t want the state choosing winners or losers or getting some PC thing going and divesting from the hookers and blow industries.
3. This one is a little weird, and if you want to discount it, so be it. But the make-up of the initial libertopians may be diverse. Some will be flush with cash, others may be poor. While the poor could get a mortgage to pay the initial cost, that adds a level of risk that would lead to lower bidding by them. I find the stream payment to be more equitable.
I see the obvious argument against the tax vs initial purchase price idea. The former is effectively an eternal mortgage, while the latter is over and done with. But as they are mathematically equivalent, I don’t see that as an actual issue. As I said in the introduction, we have to do the math.
Application to Real Life
I. None, probably. But I was thinking about it for two reasons. First, the recent discussion in which UCS and RCDean questioned the reality of imputed value. The fact that someone will pay for undeveloped land shows that imputed value or economic rents or whatever is a real thing. Even in my scenario, people would bid a positive amount for the plots, which implies that the imputed value is, in fact, a real thing that they do value.
The second, and possibly more important, reason was that I have been thinking about what a land tax would due to the resale price of unimproved land. I came up with an answer but didn’t really like it. Hence, I had to do the math. And this gedankenexperiment was the result of that. A properly valued land value tax that was exactly at the value of the economic rents (no more and no less) would reduce the resale price of unimproved land to zero.
That isn’t actually a real life situation though, as “unimproved” land is all but non-existent. Think about an empty lot in a neighborhood. Is it unimproved? Does it have a road bordering it? That is an improvement that increases the value of the land. So is a functioning court system. And deeds that can be trusted. And national defense. While they aren’t DIRECT improvements to the land, they all increase the value of the land. Being secure in your ownership is an improvement.
In fact, it might even be a flaw in my gedankenexperiment. The landing of the spaceship Sausagefest may have improved the land. But it’s a small enough improvement that I stand behind the results.
II. So how do we get from here to there? We really can’t. Without a tyranny, we can’t take all the land and auction it off. The land has improvements anyway. It would take a series of nukes to unimprove the land. The good thing about the auction was it valued the land tax properly. If we implemented one, it wouldn’t be done that way. A rate would be set, valuations would be calculated, and a crappy fiat money system would be used that wouldn’t allow anything like a stable pricing system. Humans would be involved and they screw everything up. Plus, people did pay for their land, and some of them oppose the idea of having to pay rent on it forever, too. Even if it did mean getting rid of every other form of taxation. Like any change in the tax system, there would be winners and losers (even if overall taxation was cut to a level that we won big overall), which is why it is so hard to make a change.
The Georgist Single Land Tax is a utopian fantasy. And I still favor it over the current system or any other anyone has proposed.
I’ve spent this week on a business trip to New England, and am currently in the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, fittingly the longest state name among the 57 states for the runt of the litter. I have gotten some interesting history lessons from my associates here, the most amusing of which (to me) was the SJW attempt about 10 years ago to have the state renamed because it sounded racist. That attempt was a spectacular electoral failure, which increases my respect for Rhode Island’s denizens. It is especially ironic considering Roger Williams’s own life and history, which was as a strong advocate for the local casino-not-call-center Indians, enough so to arouse the ire of the nearby Massholes. Rhode Island today is apparently a Mafia colony, which explains why it has traditionally had the highest protection money taxes in the nation.
Anyway, I’ll spend my last hours here putting up links before returning home- and I hope that SP hasn’t spent her entire allowance on more Barbie stuff while I was gone. The babysitter is supposed to watch these things, but teenagers today seem to have lost much of their sense of responsibility.
Today in history is quite momentous. It is the anniversary of the founding of the Gestapo and of the Ehrfurt mass school shooting in Germany (which I am assured never happens in Europe because of common-sense gun laws). It is also the birthday of Sal “The Barber” Maglie, Bernard Malamud (my favorite Jew-writer), Rudolph Hess (everyone’s favorite Nazi), Ma Rainey (today’s featured image), and David Hume.
The lawyer representing The Happiest Hour, Elizabeth Conway, argued that he was not discriminated against because only religious – not political – beliefs are protected under state and city discrimination law. “Supporting Trump is not a religion,” Conway argued.
Although restore disks are given to everyone who buys a computer with a licensed version of Windows (and can be downloaded for free), Microsoft decided to press criminal charges against Lundgren for distributing the disks, which he did to help people keep their computers running longer. Microsoft argued that this free-to-download software was worth $25 per disk, which the court accepted.
Ford will stop making and selling cars in the US. Except, apparently, the Mustang. Apparently, stupid rednecks who hate the Earth only want to drive pick-ups and muscle cars. We really do need more regulations to make sure that people’s freedom to choose does not include wrong choices.
OK, a weekday edition of Old Guy Music, this time from the days when Fleetwood Mac was actually an interesting band. The band I was in covered this song, so every time I hear it, my fingers start twitching in sympathetic memory.
Your humble servant, Lord Humungus, was able to parse through the history of Earth and found, written by some unknown explorer, the verbal history of STEVE SMITH. Behold his words and tremble.
STEVE SMITH LIVE LONG TIME BUT NEVER GET TIRED OF RAPE. WAS LONELY AT FIRST. BUT GOT TO MAKE MANY FRIENDS OVER THE YEARS. AND BY MAKE FRIENDS MEAN RAPE.
Hadean: TRAPPED ON PLANET. NO ONE HERE. VERY HOT. FUR GETS BURNED BY LAVA. CAN ONLY RAPE HOLES IN GROUND. WAIT LONG TIME FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN.
Archean: NO TREES. NO ANIMALS. NO PLANTS. CAN ONLY RAPE BACTERIA IN SHALLOW WATER. NOT MUCH FUN. NO FRICTION.
Proterozoic: STILL NO ANIMALS. CAN RUB AGAINST SMALL PLANTS. STILL NOT FUN COMPARED TO FLESH.
Paleozoic: FINALLY REASON TO LIVE. TRILOBITES EASY TO CATCH BUT NOT GOOD TO RAPE. FISH MUCH BETTER. SCHOOL OF FISH BEST. COUSIN SEA SMITH NEVER LEAVE BIG WATER. HIM LIKE FISH TOO MUCH.
Mesozoic: REPTILES FAST AND BIG BUT NOT WARM ENOUGH FOR STEVE SMITH. CHASING FUN BUT RAPE IS BETTER.
Jurassic: BIRDS TOO HIGH IN SKY TO GET. FRUSTRATED. DINOSAURS GOOD TO RAPE BUT PUT UP FIGHT. YOU EVER GET STEGOSAURUS PLATE IN CROTCH? IT HURT. MAKE STEVE SMITH MAD. COMET NOT DESTROY DINOSAURS. RAPE DESTROY DINOSAURS.
Cenozoic: FINALLY BEST CREATURES COME ALONG. MANY ANIMALS WITH FUR LIKE STEVE SMITH. WARM TO CUDDLE. GOOD TO RAPE. NEVER RUN OUT OF SMALL TIGHT PREY. HAPPY TIME.
Paleogene: LITTLE MONKEYS THAT LOOK LIKE ME. THEY ARE BEST TO RAPE BUT HAVE TO CLIMB TREES TO GET THEM. HARD WORK. MOSTLY RAPE BIG ANIMALS FOR SPORT.
Neogene: SOME FUNNY MONKEYS NOW RUN LIKE ME. EASY TO CATCH IN WOODS. TOO SLOW. CARRY SHARP STICKS. PUT UP FIGHT. THEY STILL RAPED. BIG FURRY ELEPHANTS GOOD FOR CUDDLING. TIGERS HAVE BIG TEETH. USE AS TOOTHPICKS.
Quaternary: SEEMS LIKE LAST WEEK. MAN ALL GROWN UP. LIVING IN BIG CITIES. HARDER TO CATCH. NOW WAIT FOR HIKERS TO GET BACK WITH NATURE. AND BY BACK MEAN RAPE. AND BY NATURE MEAN STEVE SMITH.
To make matters worse, the can I stuffed in my checked bag at Heathrow was actually brewed by a contract brewer in Scotland. Which gives me the further impression that not only does the Auld Alliance still live[!], the modern Scottish economy is mostly booze, and [fucking] sheep related.
I. Let us start with the premise of this thought experiment. A group of libertarians discovers a previous unfound island or planet or whatever. Either way, whether on sea or through space, I am pretty sure the ship is named Der Sausagefest. This land is entirely undeveloped. Their established minarchy will never spend any money it does not already have in its coffers. The land needs to be divided in a just manner. So they decide: We will divide the land into parcels and auction off the parcels. However, the auction won’t be for the price of land, the bidding will be the amount of land tax you (or any future owners) are committing to pay on the parcel each year going forward for all eternity. The land itself will be free, and come with complete property rights, except for being encumbered with the tax.
II. So how do we get from here to there? We really can’t. Without a tyranny, we can’t take all the land and auction it off. The land has improvements anyway. It would take a series of nukes to unimprove the land. The good thing about the auction was it valued the land tax properly. If we implemented one, it wouldn’t be done that way. A rate would be set, valuations would be calculated, and a crappy fiat money system would be used that wouldn’t allow anything like a stable pricing system. Humans would be involved and they screw everything up. Plus, people did pay for their land, and some of them oppose the idea of having to pay rent on it forever, too. Even if it did mean getting rid of every other form of taxation. Like any change in the tax system, there would be winners and losers (even if overall taxation was cut to a level that we won big overall), which is why it is so hard to make a change.
