Politics


Stephen Moore:

Republicans are finally getting smart on Obamacare. It took one of the savviest Republican senators — Ted Cruz of Texas, with an assist from Mike Lee of Utah — to get the GOP ‎to figure out how to replace Obamacare, reduce premiums, and save money for the government. And all without alienating millions of voters.

How it does that:

The Cruz amendment — which has been inserted into the GOP Senate health plan — is smart,because it doesn’t take anything away from anyone. If you want Obamacare — you can have it. You can have the coverage for the 10 “essential benefits,‎” you can have the subsidies and the exchanges that were supposed to save $2,500 per family. It’s still there for you.

I agree. It is a difficult challenge for politicians to take away a government benefit after you’ve become accustomed to having it, regardless of its effects on the government budget or taxpayers.

Here.

Democrats have taken the argument that Republicans want people to die if their health care reform passed.

Remy, Reason magazine’s parody expert, takes up the chant in People will die!

Matt Welsh at Reason magazine has a post about Libertarians’ reaction to Gary Johnson’s 2016 Presidential campaign. Subtitle:

Jack Hunter slams GarJo and Charles Peralo defends, while L.P. officials scheme and Austin Petersen prepares for a “special announcement.”

My view is this: all involved should learn from the campaign. From choosing candidates, to dedicating resources to specific states, to building grassroots, to messaging. Hire some party pros from the D and R parties. Get prepared for the next time. Smart candidates will do this.

And remember, Gary Johnson could be helpful in future for the LP or a campaign as a spokesman or adviser. Surely, the media will try to have him as a commentator.

I see little value in actually criticizing Johnson/Weld. It is easy as an observer and after-the-fact to criticize people. But in the heat of the battle — whether you’re on mic, being interviewed, just off a bus — is a different thing. I know I have looked back at certain actions I did and thought woulda, shoulda, coulda.

For a learning instance, don’t fall into the trap of answering questions about what the Libertarian Party stands for with abstract answers. The answers have to be relevant to potential voters. You wan to get rid of the EPA? Ain’t gonna fly. Don’t fall into the trap of ending up in a situation where you debate whether driver’s licences are needed, or something I did some years ago and ended up responding in a debate, “well, privatize the sidewalks”. Useless drivel but that’s what happens in a heated debate.

Is, in a word, government.

All the passionate talk about the personalities and potential crimes of the presidential candidates has obscured debate about what the federal government actually does. Both Trump and Clinton promise to spend us to oblivion taking care of various collectivist groups: vets, seniors, farmers, military contractors, teachers, etc.

But that spending (and inevitable taxing) serves one overriding purpose: to make the people in Washington D.C. ever richer and more powerful. Its a bipartisan bonanza. Yes, the money will trickle down to those constituents I listed above. But the politicians, lobbyists, regulators, and other government employees take their cut first. All that money requires programs and administration. Who does that? Why the people who work in government. And what is the result?

Kevin Williamson explains. I tease you with this: “But Washington builds no iPhones. It doesn’t really build much of anything, and it doesn’t create any wealth — it just takes it.

Here.

From AlternativePAC, a pro-Gary Johnson SuperPAC. Only two minutes, five seconds of your time. Some quotes:

“There’s been a fundamental paradigm shift. Power has been lifted from the elites and split between the people, through the internet. What do Uber, AirBnB, and Lyft all have in common? A way for the average user to maneuver around this top-down approach of rulers and rule-makers, legislators and regulators.”

“In the world of politics, mainstream media no longer controls the content. We use Twitter and blogs and Periscope to create context.”

“The internet has taught us the insider control the process”

“Liberty is real transpartisanship”

“Let’s unite liberty with community”

here.

I thought Trump “won” the debate. He went on offense and rebutted criticisms. We finally heard some debate on issues such as Obamacare.

What we didn’t get from either debate was a discussion on effective management of the government as an enterprise. Seems the candidates are more interested in managing and controlling the lives of the American people and the global American Empire.

The government is still spying on us, spending way too much, not reining in an unaccountable bureaucracy, not reining in entitlement programs.

What we need is a debate on effective management of the sprawling government.

Gary Johnson is aiming to do that:

What the country needs now, he [Johnson] says, is a president who will cut spending, hold taxes down, be skeptical about foreign military interventions, and allow free markets and new businessess to flourish.

 

Geez. The lies, the foul language, ignoring of unsustainable entitlement programs, Clinton’s failed record as Secretary of State, Trump’s belligerence, the diversions from policy debates. The list of embarassments continues.

There is another choice: Gary Johnson and Bill Weld. Both former governors — that means actual executive experience in government. Clinton has executive experience as a Secretary but her accomplishments suck, as in Syria.

Johnson and Weld are thoughtful, moderately tempered, with experience and accomplishments as executives in the public sector. Trump has executive experience in the private sector, which is very different from the public sector. The president — the chief executive in the public sector — is bound by constitutional limitations.

Further, on the economy, both Clinton and Trump think interacting with the world outside the US is harmful to the citizenry. Free trade may be unpopular — through rhetoric — but in fact has stood the test of time for over 200 years as an engine of economic growth. I’ve worked for American, British, and Canadian firms in my career — all based in the US. US policy needs to let more foreign investment in the US, after all, they let US firms invest in their countries.

Clinton’s tax increases and spending, and Trump’s grandiose spending plans drain resources away from the productive private sector and let politicians direct those resources to their cronies to help them get elected.

No, the economic problem is that too much of the country’s resources are directed by the public sector, and they are wasted getting politicians elected rather than productive, job-creating, wealth-creating activities.

We don’t need another law to prevent a free people from pursuing our own happiness as long as we do not aggress against another.

As Thomas Jefferson said: “Peace and friendship with all mankind is our wisest policy, and I wish we may be permitted to pursue it.”

Society and the economy are too complex to be centrally managed and planned. The people who demand to govern us tell us nobody is able to government him- or herself. Well if that’s the case, that includes them. And how do they expect to govern someone else?

Next Page »