December 21, 2005
Carnival of the Vanities #170
It’s up at Ravenwood’s Universe. Quite a few posts are Christmas-oriented, but I submitted yesterday’s post Surveillance. Check it out, lots of good posts over there.
December 20, 2005
Surveillance
Well, the big news in the blogosphere, on all sides, is the Bush wiretap problem. The Dems are yelling “impeachment!”, the Reps are circling wagons and staying silent, and we libertarians are in a quandary. It’s a matter of first determining whether the actions were legal, and second determining whether they step on civil liberties considering the wartime threat we face.
As to the first question, of legality, I can’t claim to understand this anywhere near well enough to explain it. I’ll pass off that to Orin Kerr of the Volokh Conspiracy, who comes to the conclusion that Bush’s actions were probably Constitutional, but also probably illegal under FISA. I’m not one to think any administration is above the law, so if this is legitimately illegal and blows back at Bush, he seems to deserve it. The little analysis I’ve seen shows that rather than following FISA and making sure that there was some sort of judicial review of his actions, he just authorized wiretaps and didn’t bother with FISA. After watching Bush for 5 years, he certainly seems to believe he has nobody to answer to with anything he does, so I wouldn’t be surprised if his own king-complex has gotten the better of him.
But what I’d like to focus on is the moral issue. Is this sort of behavior consistent with the sorts of civil liberties we enjoy as Americans? And being a pragmatic pro-defense libertarian, I have to ask whether the balance between defense and civil liberties has been tipped too far.
And in this case, I have to believe that we’ve crossed the line. Listening to Boortz today, it seems many of the people e-mailing him have taken the “If you’re not doing anything wrong, why would you care”, or “If you’re not a terrorist, you have nothing to worry about”. And with what this administration is doing, that’s probably true. I doubt that the government under Bush has the desire to go after anybody beyond terrorists. I don’t think that Bush is going to use this to go after political opponents, or use it to infringe upon our own liberties on issues unrelated to terrorism.
But the precedent that would be established is too dangerous to accept.
I’m not so worried about Bush. Even as much as I think he’s an ineffective bumbler, and works tirelessly to expand executive authority, I don’t think he’s a bad guy. I don’t think he’s the kind of person who would abuse this sort of power unless he thought it was absolutely necessary to our national security. But it’s not Bush that I have to be worried about. What worries me is this precedent 10 or 20 years down the road.
Think about the days when the War on Drugs was launched. Just how much increase have we seen in police power due to the war on drugs? How many people have had their cars searched with no probable cause because a policeman has said he “smelled something”. Reason has interviewed several former drug cops who are now against the War on Drugs, because they see the damage it has done to police forces and civil liberties. By changing the priorities for police departments, they’ve also allowed dangerous people to roam the streets while cops go after nonviolent drug offenders. And the increase in police power? It’s not going away, even if we end the war on drugs. Because now we have the War on Terror.
So let’s look at the possible implications of wiretaps issued by the executive branch and the DoJ without judicial oversight. I’m not a terrorist, and have no ties to terrorists, so I wouldn’t expect the DoJ to come after me for something like that. But I am politically active. It doesn’t take much for the government to harass you just enough to make life a living hell, even if they never take you to court or try to convict you for anything. Two presidents down the road, is it that hard to believe that we could see some politically-motivated wiretaps? After all, we’ve already had allegations that our last president targeted people for IRS audits to settle political scores.
As Ayn Rand said, “The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.” It is nearly impossible to make it through a day in the United States without breaking laws. So what happens when you give police and the executive branch nearly unlimited search powers? You give them arbitrary ability to look into your life without probable cause and catch you for things that are criminal not because they violate anyones rights, but are only criminal because government didn’t have enough laws.
International terrorism is a dangerous beast. And our government needs tools at its disposal to fight the threats we face today. Questions of whether or not certain aspects of FISA or the PATRIOT act are overreaches of authority our valid, but what really scares me is not the power itself, it is the ability to wield it arbitrarily. Once we allow government great powers wielded at the “discretion” of one or two people in the executive branch of the DoJ, we must fear their motives at all times. Government power with a certain level of transparency and accountability can be fought and managed. Arbitrary and total government power, wielded by an unaccountable few, simply cannot be tolerated.
The Unrepentant Individual linked with Carnival of Liberty XXVI
Target Centermass linked with Carnival of Liberty XXVI
The Unrepentant Individual linked with Carnival of the Vanities #170
Ravenwood's Universe linked with Carnival of the Vanities 170
News, the Universe, and Everything linked with Troubling Tapping
Carnivals
Carnival of Liberty XXV up at Searchlight Crusade. I’ve submitted two posts (one from the Liberty Papers), and there is all sorts of bloggy goodness to be found. Check it out.
The Carnival of the Magnolias V is up at Below the Beltway. This is the project of the Southern Blog Federation. FYI, if anyone has seen or heard from the Everyman, please let us know… He has been missing from the blogosphere since Thanksgiving.
December 19, 2005
Waste Management Reverses Charges
I got this from one of the customer service people at Waste Management via email today, in reference to this post.
I have received your request to have the amount of your bill returned to you. I have overlooked this account and we did cancel it on the day you called in, but what I will do at this time is call our WMSC to have the amount you paid reversed back to your visa card.I do apologize you did not receive your trash container and this lead to your cancelation with Waste Management. I will email you back with a confirmation number for the reverse amount of $30.91 to be place back on your credit card.
So all those bad things I said before, I take them back. Waste Management agreed to reverse the charges with absolutely nothing more than an email from me explaining my situation. I’m updating the original entry with this information as well, and thank them for their quick action to resolve the situation.
The Unrepentant Individual linked with Waste Management
Da Bears
I haven’t watched much NFL football so far this year. I’ve been a college fan since my days at Purdue, and I can rarely spend both Saturday and Sunday watching football. But since the college season is over until the bowl games start this week, I decided to sit down and watch the Falcons/Bears game last night.
Wow. Really, that’s about all I can say. Wow.
This defense is really that good. While I’m sure Mike Vick was reeling from the 9 deg (-7 deg windchill) weather in Chicago, this defense shut down Atlanta. Atlanta has been averaging about 330 yards/game on offense this season; Chicago held them to 230, in a 16-3 victory. Seeing some of the hits the Bears’ defenders laid on Vick, I’m surprised he survived the game. It was a truly inspired performance, where they negated Vick’s running ability, and kept him pressured in the pocket while passing. Vick seemed rattled most of the game, and that’s rare for him.
As for the Bears’ offense, well, that’s not exactly a shining spot on their team. Their defense is so good that it doesn’t matter very much, but they’ve struggled all year, as nearly the worst offense in the NFL. And then they did what they probably should have, but what I was very sad too see: they benched former Boilermaker QB Kyle Orton. Rex Grossman (injured most of the season) came in to start the second half , when the Bears were up 6-3, and led the offense better than Orton had been doing all game. As much as I would have loved to see Orton leading the team to victory, Grossman will be a much stronger player heading into the playoffs.
I might have to start paying attention to Da Bears again. We might be watching the Bears & Colts on February 5, 2006, playing in Super Bowl XL, because the Monsters of the Midway are back.
December 18, 2005
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
From the AP: Cheney Visits Iraq; Attacks Kill 19
I try not to blast the “liberal media” canard too often, but this one just seems over the top. What the hell kind of headline is that? Does it not suggest that the two events are somewhat related? I’m not sure if this was intended, but I find it hard to believe that it was purely accidental.
Are Income Taxes Voluntary?
Over on the FairTax blog, I bring up the question raised in this comment. Basically, there are a large number of people who believe that the vast majority of Americans don’t legally owe any income taxes. It’s certainly something that I would want to believe, but my skeptic’s side reminds me that if something’s too good to be true, it probably is.
So I issued a challenge. I need some lawyers (a tax lawyer would be preferred, but any lawyer will be better than me at this) to figure out whether these claims are true, and provide a compelling reason yea or nay. Head over there and check it out.
December 17, 2005
Waste Management
UPDATE: Waste Management graciously reversed the below charges, without so much as even a fight, so please disregard everything below. I have no reason to be upset with them any more.
—————————————
When I first moved to Georgia, my homeowner’s association was supposedly in negotiations to get trash service as a group. My gracious neighbor offered to let me leave my trash with his until that was arranged, and I took him up on the offer. After a few weeks, it seemed that the HOA wasn’t making any progress, so I decided to set up my own trash service.
So I contacted Waste Management. It seemed that several other folks in the neighborhood used them, and I’d seen their trucks all over the place, so I figured they’d be the most reputable choice. I called them, set up an account, and they told me that they would leave me a Waste Management trash can, because they won’t pick up trash from other companies’ containers (which mine was).
So I put my trash out there the first week. It wasn’t collected, and there was no new trash can. I called them, and they said they’d make sure to get me the trash can ASAP. The next week, I put my trash out again. It wasn’t collected, and there was no new trash can. I called them, and let them know about it. They said there was some confusion on the routes, and thus they’d have it out to me on the next week. The next week arrives, I put out my trash, and it is not collected, nor do I have a new trash can. As you can imagine, this trash can is growing quite full after a few weeks of trash. I call them, and tell them that I need to get the new trash can, because they’re not collecting my trash. I told them that if they are unable to get the trash can to me, I’m going to have to cancel my trash service and find someone else.
The next week, still no trash can. I take my trash over to a local strip-mall, because the can is very heavy at this point, dump it in one of the random dumpsters out back, and can finally breathe a little easier. This is right before I went to France. While I’m in France, my wife gets a phone call from the strip mall, telling her that if we ever drop our trash in their dumpster again, they’ll call the cops. Ooops!
I’m justifiably pissed at this point. I call Waste Management and bitch them out. I tell them that I am cancelling my service, and that I don’t plan to pay my bill because they have not provided the service they promised me. They take care of everything over the phone, and I think the nightmare is over. I was therefore surprised when I got a bill the other day. They had taken off all of the actual service charges, but stuck me with the account setup fees and all the other junk fees that are associated.
It’s $30.91, and I don’t have the time or energy to fight this, so I’ve rolled over and paid it. But they’ve pissed off this customer, and this customer has a blog. I warn all of you (at least those of you who live in places where there are competing trash services) to stay away from Waste Management. I ended up choosing BFI (now known as Allied Waste Services, and have been very happy so far. I think it even works out to be cheaper every month than Waste Management was, so I got that going for me.
The Unrepentant Individual linked with Waste Management Reverses Charges
Free Pizza and Beer!
Alright, now that I’ve got your attention, let me direct you to the… Free Pizza and Beer!!!
Galaska, 48, of Bellevue, Neb., was among the hundreds of men who came out for men’s night at Omaha jewelry store Borsheim’s this week, which uses free pizza and beer to counteract the otherwise intimidating notion of buying jewelry.
…
That is especially evident around the holidays. Stores hold functions tailored specifically to men and increasingly women, who are often encouraged to fill out wishlists to make shopping easier for men. Saks Fifth Avenue brought in Playboy centerfolds to act as men’s personal shoppers earlier this month in New York. Centerfolds aside, men’s night outs are also being held at shopping malls around the country, such as at King of Prussia Mall in King of Prussia, Penn., and Fox River Mall in Appleton, Wis.
Galaska’s wife filled out her wishlist the previous week at Borsheim’s ladies’ night. All Galaska had to do this week was say her name, and clerks began to bring out what his wife wanted.
This, my friends, is why capitalism will always defeat communism. You know how cool this is? Even I would shop if offered free pizza and beer!
Hat Tip: Joust the Facts
2nd Hat Tip: Wizbang’s Carnival of the Trackbacks
December 16, 2005
I Hate Poker
I swear, it’s the land of bad beats for me lately… The other night, I’m playing a tourney online, early in the tournament I get pocket aces. Raise pre-flop, as I should, one caller (big blind). Flop comes Q-9-2. Big Blind bets into me. I’m fairly certain my aces are good at this point, so I move all-in. Big Blind calls with A-9, so I’ve got Aces and he’s got nines. And he proceeds to catch another 9 on the turn for three of a kind, knocking me out.
So I’m playing the next night, in another tournament. We’re down to 5 spots (top three pay). I’ve been on the ropes all tourney, but had just caught a hand and had some chips. I’m dealt pocket tens. The blinds are high enough that it makes sense to push all-in, so I do. One short-stack calls, and a third (one of the chip leaders at the table) also calls. Short stack has pocket 2’s, chip leader has AK. Pre-flop, I’m a 44% favorite, AK is 37.5% to win, and the short stack is dominated. So what happens? Mister AK hits a king for his pair. Goodbye, Brad. I finished a tournament that pays the top 3 spots in 4th place.
I don’t know what it is about Ace-King. Usually called big slick, fellow blogger Brucefan calls Anna Kournikova, because it looks really good, but rarely wins. Well, that’s not true. It looks pretty good, and always wins, as long as I’m not holding it!
Case in point. 2-table tournament tonight. We’re down to 5 people, I’m the slight short-stack. I get dealt pocket nines. At this point in the tournament, I’ve got to make a move, and now is my time. One player has called the blind, so I move all-in. The next highest chip count calls, and the original caller folds. So we’re heads-up. I’ve got nines, and he has, you guessed it, AK. That makes me a 55% favorite to win the hand. Of course, he hits his king, pairs up on me, and that’s that. I finish a tournament that pays 4 spots in 5th place… I’m beginning to detect a pattern here.
I really don’t know if it’s just me, but I think I’m plainly bad luck. I’ve always thought that I’m a decent poker player. I simply cannot count the number of times that I make the right bet or the right call, I’m the statistical favorite in a hand, and yet I lose. I’m thinking I need to start telling my opponents to just call me on every hand, because even if I’ve got the stone-cold nuts, they’ll find a way to draw out on me.
Can anyone tell I’m a little frustrated?
The Unrepentant Individual linked with Affiliate Strategy
West Wing Actor Dies
John Spencer, the actor who plays Leo McGarry on The West Wing, has passed away:
Tragically, for John Spencer, life didn’t imitate art.
A year after his West Wing alter ego survived a heart attack, Spencer was felled Friday morning by a deadly one. He was four days shy of his 59th birthday.
A 2002 Emmy winner for the long-running NBC presidential series, Spencer was an original and still key cast member as Leo McGarry, the battle-tested chief of staff turned vice presidential candidate.
I’m speechless at this point, so all I can say is rest in peace.
FairTax Friday #2
The second week of the FairTax Friday carnival is up over at Buzz Brockway’s blog.
Interesting week for FairTax blogging, as the Mises blog took aim at the FairTax. From what I saw of their critique, they never ask whether or not the FairTax is good or bad. They seem to rest on the idea that because all taxation is theft, improving our tax system is a Bad Thing™. Very Rothbardian of them, but I certainly fixing the system we have is a HECK of a lot more likely than convincing the government to scrap the idea of taxation in general.
Check out the carnival when you get a chance.
December 15, 2005
Housing Costs – Two Views
Ezra Klein quoted yesterday from a Center for Housing Policy report in which they lament the lack of “affordable housing” for low income individuals. The study (and Ezra) focused on the fact that it is becoming a growing concern for low-income individuals and families to try to balance housing costs with the need to work lower-income jobs. Specifically,
that says a whole helluva lot about our economy’s direction, not to mention the sustainability of the housing market. Workers in many of the country’s fastest growing sectors will not be able to afford decent housing. Wage subsidies like the EITC might help them over the hump, but the promise of a middle class lifestyle will remain, save for some radical legislative changes, an empty dream.
Now, all of us who understand markets know that there are very good reasons for the rising costs of housing. Of course, we don’t even need to understand the mechanics, the very existence of an “efficient market” sort of hypothesis teaches us that there must be some sense to this. Housing costs do not rise and “affordable housing” remain sparse without there being some sort of mechanism.
One mechanism, of course, is a general lack of space. Jobs are located in and near major cities, and thus there is a pressure by workers to live as close to their workplace as possible. This is especially true in major cities, where traffic is horrible. In cities, land usage is already fairly substantial, so with high property values it only makes sense to produce housing of high enough value to recoup their investment. I would actually stipulate that in and around cities, the general lack of space is frequently the largest contributing factor to housing costs.
In a free market, however, certain equilibriums are found. As space becomes a premium, population density tends to increase. There is a lot to be said about government restrictions and zoning guidelines which slow the rate of growth of any housing, and those regulations play a huge factor in this part of the equation, as Doug points out over at The Liberty Papers:
Existing homeowners, in other words, have become more politically active and have been using the power of their local governments and zoning boards to prevent developers from building new homes regardless of whether the demand exists. The result, of course, is predictable, with a decreased supply of housing, the price of that housing increases. Hence, the housing market “bubble†that everyone talks about. And, since the market is not being permitted to operate in its normal fashion, distortions are inevitable.
As I said above, markets are naturally efficient. They provide what is in most demand in the market. Obviously, that does not mean in any sense that markets provide what is socially desirable. Markets don’t necessarily provide “affordable housing”. It is a simple fact that in a market, often we are faced with trade-offs. And those trade-offs ensure that in places like Manhattan or San Francisco, there is simply not enough space for a market to create affordable enough housing that low-income workers can live comfortably. And markets find their equilibriums based on all information available. The fact that in places like San Francisco, there are such anti-building policies, change the enviroment surrounding the market, and thus impact the market’s behavior considerably.
According to Wikipedia, the population density of San Francisco is 6212.25/km², and in New York, it is 10,292/km², yet the cost of living between the two is equal. How can this be? As I pointed out in the comments of Ezra Klein’s post, here it comes down to regulation and other zoning issues.
In New York, they took the limited real estate and expanded the one place you don’t need more land: UP. But that’s something you don’t see in San Francisco. Having lived in San Jose a couple years ago, I can’t say that I saw many residential buildings taller than 4 stories. And even in an earthquake zone, you can easily build structures well above four stories. Comparing the cities, New York is 66% more dense than San Francisco, but they’ve adopted policies that make them roughly equal in cost-of-living*. And San Francisco isn’t likely to change any time soon, as the city has decided (certainly not consciously) that it is more important to keep the status quo and watch families and low-income people leave in droves, than adopt policies that will solve the problem. At the same time, they lament the fact that builders are only building luxury dwellings, when their own policies ensure that builders will only make a profit on luxury dwellings.
As they say, TANSTAAFL.
UPDATE: It looks like Ezra Klein had a malfunction, and all posts after Dec 9 got eaten. Unfortunately, it looks like it may not be possible to access the link over there.
The Unrepentant Individual linked with Housing Costs - great read
Searchlight Crusade linked with The Economics of Housing Development
December 14, 2005
Smokers Catch NO Breaks…
Calif. Coalition Seeks Cigarette Tax Hike
A coalition of health organizations wants to quadruple the tax on a pack of cigarettes in California to boost funding for a variety of health programs.
The per-pack tax would jump by $2.60 under an initiative the coalition hopes to place on the November 2006 ballot, supporters said Tuesday. If voters approve the proposal, California’s total tax on a pack of cigarettes would rise to $3.47, the highest in the nation.
The initiative combines tobacco tax measures from the California Hospital Association and the American Cancer Society. The new campaign includes the American Lung Association of California, the American Heart Association and the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, among others.
Revenue from the higher tax would be directed to various health programs, including cancer screening, prevention and research, low-cost children’s insurance, and tobacco education and cessation.
Someone wants to slap a 3% sales tax on fast food, and the world is in an uproar. Someone wants to slap a 250% sales tax on cigarettes, and that’s just normal news. In my earlier post, one commentor asked why companies are firing smokers but not fat people, well here’s your answer.
First Hate Mail!
Sweet! After a year or so of blogging, I got the first hateful, threatening comment on my blog! It was on my post about the BCS Bowl announcements, where I expressed my desire to see the Irish lose…
So, in a fit of profanity (in ALL CAPS, of course), this gentle soul called me names, expressed his desire that somebody kick the s**t out of me, and claimed that the Irish “RULE!!!”
I’d say that this behavior may make me think less of typical Notre Dame fans (who certainly never attended that very fine university), but that’s not particularly possible. What I am sure of, however, is that for Notre Dame alumni, this idiot showed very quickly that he lacks the intellectual weight to be admitted to Notre Dame. This guy is not very representative of Notre Dame alumni, but unfortunately he is quite representative of a typical Irish fan. I’d also say that this behavior is not indicative of Catholicism, but then I realize that they were the perpetrators of the Spanish Inquisition!
« Previous Page — Next Page »
Troubling Tapping
President Bush has admitted that he authorized the NSA to act outside the law with regards to domestic wiretaps, a fact that the New York Times has been widely criticized for reporting. Personally, I think that (for once) the Times did the American p…
Trackback by News, the Universe, and Everything — December 20, 2005 @ 1:45 pm
Brad, Did you go read this: http://www.sparkpod.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/sparkpod.woa/wa/view?1021127
I wonder what you will say when someone with a dirty bomb comes to Atlanta, or anywhere for that matter, and kills 50,000 people? Will people scream, Why didn’t you know this was coming? Why didn’t you protect this country? It is a slippery slop, this wiretapping, and it is hard to say what is right.
Comment by Lucy Stern — December 20, 2005 @ 3:48 pm
Carnival of the Vanities 170
It’s that time of year again. The holidays are upon us, and the internet will soon slow to a crawl as bloggers of all faiths spend more time with their families, take vacations, or just sit back and relax. But…
Trackback by Ravenwood's Universe — December 20, 2005 @ 11:06 pm
Lucy,
I have learned a little more about the situation, and to some extent, if this were only used as an intelligence-gathering expedition, and never as a start of criminal prosecution, I could accept it.
But it appears that Bush may have used the information learned here not only as a tactical intelligence-gathering tool to stop foreign attacks. It appears that he has used the information gained here to then obtain FISA warrants. This means that the FISA warrants are not being generated on legitimate probable cause, because the probable cause is based upon essentially an unreasonable search.
Think of it this way: a cop pulls you over, asks you to step out of the car, never obtains consent or a warrant to search your vehicle, but opens the trunk and finds a bank statement that indicates a lot of money flowing through your account. He uses this bank statement to obtain a search warrant to look into your financial dealings, and finds out that you’re laundering money. That evidence should be inadmissable, because the probable cause to search your financial records was obtained illegally.
What we’re seeing is exactly this. Bush purportedly has used illegal methods to obtain information as the probable cause to obtain illegitimate searches and warrants. To then use any information obtained in those warrants for criminal prosecution would be wrong. I can understand using it to stop impending attacks, but it seems that what is going on may be more sinister.
Comment by Brad Warbiany — December 21, 2005 @ 1:46 pm
[...] Recent Posts Carnival of the Vanities #170 Surveillance Carnivals Waste Management Reverses Charges Da Bears Post hoc ergo propter hoc Are Income Taxes Voluntary? Waste Management Free Pizza and Beer! I Hate Poker West Wing Actor Dies FairTax Friday #2 Housing Costs – Two Views Smokers Catch NO Breaks… First Hate Mail! [...]
Pingback by The Unrepentant Individual » Carnival of the Vanities #170 — December 21, 2005 @ 2:05 pm
Actually, that search very well might be valid. I did some digging on car searches a while back when my friend got pulled over, and the police are allowed to search any part of the car “in plain view” during a traffic stop, without consent or a warrant. “In plain view” has been determined to include the trunk. As for probable cause, well, you were acting pretty suspicious, so that cop just had to search your car.
Sorry to hijack the post, just felt like I’d point out another one of our civil liberties that is being eroded away.
Comment by Mike — December 21, 2005 @ 2:06 pm
Carnival of Liberty XXVI
Welcome to Carnival of Liberty XXVI, smack in the heart of the holiday season.
But first, a few preliminaries.
This carnival is primarily, though not exclusively, the work of the Life, Liberty, Property community, and I’d like to thank its fou…
Trackback by Target Centermass — December 27, 2005 @ 11:05 pm
[...] Recent Posts Carnival of Liberty XXVI Housing Costs – great read Largest Burrito I’ve Ever Seen Read this to keep yourselves from missing me… Headed to Cali NCAA as Simpson’s Characters? Carnival of the Vanities #170 Surveillance Carnivals Waste Management Reverses Charges Da Bears Post hoc ergo propter hoc Are Income Taxes Voluntary? Waste Management Free Pizza and Beer! [...]
Pingback by The Unrepentant Individual » Carnival of Liberty XXVI — December 28, 2005 @ 10:01 am