Knox Area Libertarian Party

Smaller Government. Lower Taxes. More Freedom.

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
The Knox Area Libertarian Party

The Machinery of Freedom

E-mail Print PDF

A great introduction into Libertarian ideas. The book was originally written in 1973 and revised in 1989.

We can all understand, for the most part, where people are coming from when they want to impose their beliefs of "a great society" onto others. They feel they know what is best and want everyone else to follow suit; but should they be forced to believe what you feel is "best"?

The first two paragraphs really sum up what being a Libertarian is all about.

The central idea of libertarianism is that people should be permitted to run their own lives as they wish. We totally reject the idea that people must be forcibly protected from themselves. A libertarian society would have no laws against drugs, gambling, pornography —and no compulsory seat belts in cars. We also reject the idea that people have an enforceable claim on others, for anything more than being left alone. A libertarian society would have no welfare, no Social Security system. People who wished to aid others would do so voluntarily through private charity, instead of using money collected by force from the taxpayers. People who wished to provide for their old age would do so through private insurance.

People who wish to live in a 'virtuous' society, surrounded by others who share their ideas of virtue, would be free to set up their own communities and to contract with each other so as to prevent the 'sinful' from buying or renting within them. Those who wished to live communally could set up their own communes. But nobody would have a right to force his way of life upon his neighbor.

You can download the entire book in PDF form here: http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf

 

Is the Current Census Constitutional? The Answer May Surprise You

E-mail Print PDF

by Harold Pease
The Tenth Amendment Center

There are only two reasons given in the US Constitution for what we now call the census: determining the number of representatives needed for a given area, and directing federal taxes.  Constitutionally there is but one legitimate question: how many people live in this residence?  With the House of Representatives based upon population the first reason is obvious.  But the second reason expired when the 16th  Amendment to the Constitution introduced the infamous income tax.

Today, three columns of invasive questions across 28 pages are asked in the companion to this year’s census- the American Community Survey.  Though the current census has been reduced to ‘just’ 10 questions, the old census ‘long form’ data is now being gathered via the ACS.  In their words:

"The ongoing American Community Survey has replaced the decennial census long form in 2010 and thereafter by collecting long form-type information throughout the decade rather than once every 10 years."

Washington DC’s violations of your privacy will now be continuous, rather than once per decade.  With respect to housing they want to know what kind of building you live in, when it was built, how many rooms, your mortgage, taxes, insurance and utility costs, and move-in date.  They also want to know how many automobiles are kept on the premises.

With respect to your personal life, the Feds want to know how many times you were married, the date of your last marriage, and if you have serious difficulty concentrating or bathing.  At one point they even asked for the number of stillbirths or abortions you have had. Even your nosiest neighbor does not know these things.

Read more...
   
 

Government Grinds the Gears

E-mail Print PDF
By Richard W. Rahn
CATO Institute (Originally on the Washington Times)

If you knew that baseball teams with winning records tended to be more profitable for their owners than those with losing records — and if you learned that the Baltimore Orioles had just been purchased by the major league umpire's union, would you expect the Orioles to win more or fewer games? Almost everyone implicitly understands why the umpires should not be allowed to own teams they referee.

In a free-market economic system, the government is supposed to be the referee and not a player. Its job is to set and enforce the rules, but if it is allowed to also become a player, by owning and managing business enterprises, it is unlikely to treat the competing companies fairly, and there will be little check on its own misbehavior. Congress is now debating whether the U.S. government will create its own national health provider. The government is now the majority owner of the nation's biggest automobile manufacturer (General Motors Corp.), the biggest bank (Citigroup Inc.), and the biggest insurance company (American International Group Inc.). The record of government ownership and/or control of companies in the United States and elsewhere has been one long disaster.

Look at the past year alone. The nation's largest man-made environmental disaster (according to the New York Times) was the coal-ash spill in Tennessee on Dec. 28, 2008, caused by negligence at the Tennessee Valley Authority (a federal-government-owned enterprise). By volume, this spill was 48 times bigger than the Exxon Valdez spill. This September, the government formally took over mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, whose financial holes were many times larger than those of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., WorldCom, Enron Corp. or GM. Fannie and Freddie were both U.S. government-sponsored and -regulated companies that had the implicit guarantee of the U.S. taxpayer.

Yet the companies not only failed, but between them have also left the U.S. taxpayer liable for more than $1 trillion. All too many in the mainstream media choose to ignore or underreport government failures while hyping private- company failures. Just look at the press coverage of the Exxon Valdez versus the TVA Tennessee spill, or the coverage given Enron versus Fannie and Freddie.
Read more...
 
  • «
  •  Start 
  •  Prev 
  •  1 
  •  2 
  •  3 
  •  Next 
  •  End 
  • »


Page 1 of 3

Poll

Do you support HJR108; a bill that would affirm Tennessee's sovereignty?