Are You Happy that Tax Dollars Subsidized the Tsarnaev Family?

FYI - Some VERY good food for thought from Dan Mitchell/The International Liberty Blog.

#LiveFree

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Are You Happy that Your Tax Dollars Subsidized the Tsarnaev Family?

by Dan Mitchell

The bad news is that there are despicable and evil people seeking to kill innocents.

The worse news is that some of these pathetic excuses for protoplasm are subsidized by taxpayers.

It's happened in France, Australia, and the United Kingdom.

And we now know that the Tsarnaev family was on he dole as well.

Which makes this cartoon funny, but at the same time not funny at all.

I used to think it was outrageous that the welfare state funded bad behavior (as illustrated by this humorous poster), as well as general laziness and moral depravity.

But there should be a special wing of the Moocher Hall of Fame for taxpayer-subsidized terrorists.

A Libertanrian's Response To Terrorism.

FYI - From International Liberty/Dan Mitchell.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

New post on International Liberty

Question of the Week: What’s the Libertarian Response to Terrorism? by Dan Mitchell I've received several variations of this question since starting my "Question of the Week" series. Having never studied the terrorism issue, I've been ignoring those queries. But I got several new emails on the topic after what happened in Boston, so I'm answering simply to make one point. There's no way to create a perfectly safe, risk-free society. That being said - and with the caveat that I have no expertise in this field, here are some random thoughts on the topic. Libertarians want less interventionism around the world, and perhaps that will reduce hostility against the United States, but some of these nutjobs hate us because of our freedoms. So even a perfect foreign policy (whatever that even is) provides no guarantee we won't get attacked. That being said, I think Ron Paul has screwed up big time in some of his criticisms of U.S. actions. Being against nation building does not mean you have to be against killing terrorists. If you want to cause trouble, find a bunch of young men with no purpose in their lives and lots of time on their hands. Combine that with religious extremists who tell those men that they will get a bunch of virgins* in paradise if they die while killing Westerners, and you have a nontrivial supply of future terrorists. I suspect part of the answer will have to come from within the Islamic community, though I confess that I'm puzzled by the inaction on that front even though one imagines that 99 percent of Muslims don't support terrorism. Terrorists and would-be terrorists get information from the Internet that fuels their hate and provides knowledge on how to conduct attacks. I'm rather sympathetic to drone attacks on the scum in the Middle East who are directly seeking to instigate/plan terrorism, but I don't see any feasible or desirable way to control and/or regulate the Internet (just like I don't see a feasible or desirable way to regulate video games, even if it was shown that violent games somehow inspired Newtown-type killers). Close monitoring of pro-terrorist websites and chat rooms is a very legitimate and proper function of law enforcement and the intelligence community. Being a Muslim shouldn't be a cause for investigation and harassment by the government. Being a Muslim who uses the Internet to visit such sites is a cause for investigation and harassment (and the same is true for members of any other group with a history of violence). Monitoring of Mosques also is a proper function of government, just as I also have no objection of law enforcement monitoring militia groups, environmental groups, etc, etc. Obviously, the monitoring of any group should be selectively focused on those strains that are believed to espouse violence. I don't know where you draw the line between freedom of religion and incitement of violence, but I have zero sympathy for radical Imams preaching hate inside the United States and would like to see them shut down/imprisoned/deported if they cross that line. Yes, I'm disgusted by the leftists in the press who obviously hope for a "right wing" link any time there's an attack. These are the same journalists, by the way, who weren't even slightly bothered by Barack Obama's association with Bill Ayers, a real-life terrorist who bombed the NYC police department, the U.S. Capitol, and the Pentagon. I favor immigration, but I want people who believe in tolerance and hard work. There should be some sort of test, however imperfect, designed to weed out those who do not believe in assimilation. I'm still flabbergasted that the U.S. government is so bloody incompetent that it gave a greed card to the so-called Blink Sheik. Such people should never be let in the country and there should be mechanisms for quick deportation (perhaps halfway across the Atlantic) if they do slip through the net. *I hope these are the virgins they meet. P.S. Like anybody with common sense, I want' our anti-terrorism policies to be based on cost-benefit analysis, which is why I'm generally critical of the Transportation Security Administration.

Private Property Is a Key to Environmental Protection.

FYI - Some good food for thought from International Liberty/Dan Mitchell.

-ADY "A Regular Guy On The Issues"

Private Property Is a Key to Environmental Protection by Dan Mitchell A couple of weeks ago, before leaving for Europe, I stopped by the High Lonesome Ranch in De Beque, Colorado. City slicker in the CO mountains Controlling about 300 square miles, the High Lonesome is a remarkable spread. And if you like wildlife, you're in Heaven. It's sort of akin to a private national park. And it shows how free markets are an excellent steward of natural resources. The folks at the ranch brag about having the heaviest concentration of elk, deer, bear, and mountain lion in the country. That's probably not easy to verify, but deer and elk are ubiquitous and I saw two bear on the trip (I also saw a badger on a previous visit). The mountain lions are largely invisible, though the ranch has a project - as part of its education and conservation work - with some academics to monitor the range, feeding habits, and behavior of these impressive animals. Another noteworthy feature of the ranch is the way hydrologists are protecting and restoring streams and ponds. They have an incentive to do this because people from around the country come to the High Lonesome for fly fishing. Obviously not a very bright trout I very much doubt that all this valuable work would take place if a bunch of bureaucrats were in charge of the property. Or, if it did take place, it would take three times as long and cost five times as much thanks to the nightmarish incompetency and misaligned incentives of the government procurement process. Hunting is another source of revenue that enables the ranch to preserve natural resources. It goes without saying (but I'll say it anyhow in case some leftists read this) that this means the owners have a big incentive to protect wildlife and ensure a sustainable harvest. Heck, there are now so many bear that they are almost at the point of being a nuisance animal. I did a bit of fishing, as you can see from the photo with the remedial trout. Maybe I should try some hunting at some point. The 2nd Amendment in action But probably not bird hunting. The ranch is filled with pheasants, quail, chuckers, and other game birds, but I haven't been overly impressive when I've tried the sporting clays. The clay that shoots straight in the air was particularly vexing. Fortunately, I doubt burglars would have that ability, so I'll still be okay with home defense. The Chi-coms better avoid Fairfax While I wasn't overly proficient with the shotgun, I think I did okay with the rifle. I was a bit high and to the left on the target range, but one of the guides said anything within the bigger orange square is a kill shot. Then again, part of their job may be to stroke the egos of visitors from the cities and suburbs. In any event, a bear hunt might be a good idea. I have a fireplace at home, and it might look nice with a bearskin rug in front of it. All I'd be missing, then, is a lovely lass to pose on it. But I'm digressing. The point of this post is to simply note that this piece of property is something every environmentalist should applaud. And it's all made possible by the free market and private property rights.