Good talk. Civil disobedience is coming.
Found from a video posted at Home on the Range.
Showing posts with label bad laws. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bad laws. Show all posts
Saturday, August 8, 2015
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
More useless legislation
More and more I think we need a concise amendment to the Constitution - something along the lines of "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW.".There would be some exceptions - like budgets - with strict rules on what they could say...
How will yet another law, written by lawyers for lawyers, go any good?
Obama says hacks show need for cybersecurity law
If I am not mistaken, there are already quite a few federal laws on the books addressing hackers and cyber crime. Some harken back to the 1970's.Washington (AFP) - President Barack Obama said Tuesday the cyber attacks against Sony and the Pentagon's Central Command highlight the need for toughened laws on cybersecurity.Obama made the comment as the White House unveiled a proposal to revive cybersecurity legislation stalled over the past few years.
How will yet another law, written by lawyers for lawyers, go any good?
Tuesday, February 25, 2014
The right to refuse
It should have been obvious as the next move. With federal law prohibiting "discrimination" for just about any reason you can think of, comes the backlash - Arizona, and maybe Alabama, proposing laws enforcing a business owner's right to refuse to serve anyone if serving that person would go against their religious beliefs.
As much as I hate the government doing ANYTHING that interferes with an individual's right to do business - or not do business - with anyone, for any reason whatsoever - I cannot back laws like this.
It's none of the government's business who a private person associates with, or refuses to associate with. If you don't like Irishmen and Germans, you should be free to start a club called "No Irishmen or Germans Allowed!". Only people of like mind will join - and any Irishman or German who is angry to be excluded should be happy to avoid people who dislike their nationality.
If a business refuses to cater to persons of "alternative gender", they will suffer the loss of profits from sales to those people, and if enough of the community feels that their "intolerance" is intolerable, they will also take their business elsewhere. The business owner will survive on sales to people of like mind, or those who don't give a fig about it, or will go under if they offend enough prospective customers. No governmental intervention is needed, or desirable.
I firmly believe that much of the remaining animosity between people of different "races" in America is a direct result of anti-discrimination laws and even worse, "affirmative action" laws. Rubbing people's faces in racial differences by law is a sure way to keep generating new bigots generation after generation.
How about a law, at the federal level - there shall be no law enacted that in any way interferes with an individual's or organization's right to associate - or refuse to associate - with anyone for any reason whatever.
And then let the free market sort it out.
As much as I hate the government doing ANYTHING that interferes with an individual's right to do business - or not do business - with anyone, for any reason whatsoever - I cannot back laws like this.
It's none of the government's business who a private person associates with, or refuses to associate with. If you don't like Irishmen and Germans, you should be free to start a club called "No Irishmen or Germans Allowed!". Only people of like mind will join - and any Irishman or German who is angry to be excluded should be happy to avoid people who dislike their nationality.
If a business refuses to cater to persons of "alternative gender", they will suffer the loss of profits from sales to those people, and if enough of the community feels that their "intolerance" is intolerable, they will also take their business elsewhere. The business owner will survive on sales to people of like mind, or those who don't give a fig about it, or will go under if they offend enough prospective customers. No governmental intervention is needed, or desirable.
I firmly believe that much of the remaining animosity between people of different "races" in America is a direct result of anti-discrimination laws and even worse, "affirmative action" laws. Rubbing people's faces in racial differences by law is a sure way to keep generating new bigots generation after generation.
How about a law, at the federal level - there shall be no law enacted that in any way interferes with an individual's or organization's right to associate - or refuse to associate - with anyone for any reason whatever.
And then let the free market sort it out.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Another brick in the wall
According to this S. 1813 will strip you of all your Second Amendment rights.
+++++++++++++++++++++
Senate Bill 1813 (Highway trust fund), which was passed by the Senate last week and is now pending in the House of Representatives contains a provision that would allow the IRS to order the State Department to refuse to grant, refuse to renew, revoke or restrict the passport of any US citizen which the IRS certifies owes the IRS $50,000 or more in unpaid taxes. There is no requirement that the tax payer be guilty of or even charged with tax evasion, fraud, or any criminal offense - only that the citizen is alleged to owe the IRS back taxes of $50,000 or more.
With Capital Control measures expected to be implemented in 2013, which would force Americans to keep their money from going offshore, the laws being legislated are now affecting the average citizen far more than any action against terrorists, or in support of the 'War on Terror'. +++++++++++++++++++++
Pretty soon, owing the government $50K will be forgetting to pay a parking ticket, the way our dollar is diving.
S. 1813 is one of those big omnibus bills, mostly concerned with transportation and such. Haven't read it all yet, but will. Here's the PDF.
Buried on page 12 of 1200+. still in the table of contents, I found this:
+++++++++++++++++++++
Bill in Congress could suspend your passport if you own taxes to the IRS
Written By Kenneth Schortgen Jr on Friday, March 23, 2012 | 11:35 AM
There is a new bill in Congress that is expected to pass that would allow the government to suspend your travel outside the country if you own taxes to the IRS.Senate Bill 1813 (Highway trust fund), which was passed by the Senate last week and is now pending in the House of Representatives contains a provision that would allow the IRS to order the State Department to refuse to grant, refuse to renew, revoke or restrict the passport of any US citizen which the IRS certifies owes the IRS $50,000 or more in unpaid taxes. There is no requirement that the tax payer be guilty of or even charged with tax evasion, fraud, or any criminal offense - only that the citizen is alleged to owe the IRS back taxes of $50,000 or more.
With Capital Control measures expected to be implemented in 2013, which would force Americans to keep their money from going offshore, the laws being legislated are now affecting the average citizen far more than any action against terrorists, or in support of the 'War on Terror'. +++++++++++++++++++++
Pretty soon, owing the government $50K will be forgetting to pay a parking ticket, the way our dollar is diving.
S. 1813 is one of those big omnibus bills, mostly concerned with transportation and such. Haven't read it all yet, but will. Here's the PDF.
Buried on page 12 of 1200+. still in the table of contents, I found this:
Sec. 40304. Revocation or denial of passport in case of certain unpaid taxes.Time to call your CONgresscritters, if they will listen to you, unlike my own dear Tammy Gay Baldwin...
Sec. 40305. 100 percent continuous levy on payments to Medicare providers
and suppliers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)