Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - MarcNelsonJr

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 201
1
National Politics / Re: Is A Basic Income Inevitable?
« on: Today at 12:13:51 AM »
The human psyche benefits from work.

Does it? Hunter-gatherer cultures (the way of life for 90% of human history) only worked a few hours a day.

My psyche would benefit from nothing but beers on a warm beach.

:D

2
National Politics / Re: Is A Basic Income Inevitable?
« on: October 20, 2014, 11:07:58 PM »
The human psyche benefits from work.

Does it? Hunter-gatherer cultures (the way of life for 90% of human history) only worked a few hours a day.

3
National Politics / Re: Racists want to close border to Ebola
« on: October 20, 2014, 10:53:24 PM »
Who is the racist?

Sarcasm. :)

Anyone calling for restrictions on travel from Ebola-infested countries has been tarred as a racist. I was just pointing out that travel restrictions aren't quite the racist Tea Party plot they've been made out to be.

I am not saying they are racist, but...

Given the number of jihadis that are British, why are we not calling for a travel ban from London?  If there was an outbreak in London of the same type that is in West Africa, would there be the same calls for a travel ban?

Was the Mexican government acting out of racism when it kept the American cruise ship from docking?

How about Jamaica, Trinidad, and Guyana? Are their travel restrictions motivated by racism?

4
National Politics / Re: Racists want to close border to Ebola
« on: October 20, 2014, 08:03:57 PM »
Who is the racist?

Sarcasm. :)

Anyone calling for restrictions on travel from Ebola-infested countries has been tarred as a racist. I was just pointing out that travel restrictions aren't quite the racist Tea Party plot they've been made out to be.

5
National Politics / Racists want to close border to Ebola
« on: October 20, 2014, 01:30:54 AM »
Quote
Mexico fails to grant access to cruise ship carrying Texas health worker

The cruise ship carrying a Texas health-care worker who “may have” handled lab specimens from Dallas Ebola victim Thomas Eric Duncan is headed back to the United States after Mexican authorities failed to grant permission for the ship to dock off the coast of Cozumel, according to a Carnival spokeswoman.

Si se puede? ;)

6
Local Politics / Re: Cumberland City Mayoral Race
« on: October 20, 2014, 01:20:23 AM »
Mary Miltenberger said in the paper today that the city is keeping $190,000 of the $249,000 it received in hotel/motel tax money. The rest went to various tourism groups like the railroad and arts, etc. Where does this money go? I feel it needs to used for tourism. I don't agree with Mary's politics a whole lot, but she has a point here. Also, what happened to Jeffry Grogg?

The number from the FY15 budget is $230K. According to the T-N, the mayor and council disbursed almost $59K of that, leaving $171K.

I believe that in the past, some of that money has gone towards police overtime for events and things like that. Whether that accounts for all of the balance, I don't know. Perhaps one of our council members will inform us...?

I'd personally put public safety and infrastructure ahead of the tourist railroads and arts councils and basketball tournaments. You know what else tourists like? Well-policed places with streets that are in good repair.

I don't care where the money came from - that doesn't give anyone a claim on it. Do we take the money that CSX pays in taxes and give it back to them via a "Railroad Fund"? What about Queen City Motors, or Gianni's, or even you and me? Where's our fund? :)

7
It's not just Allegany County. (And here's the New York Times, if you want a second opinion.)

Relative poverty is one thing; wealth has never been evenly geographically distributed. But just because you can't make as much money here as you can in Bethesda is no reason why our community should be afflicted with the crime, drug abuse, broken homes, and so on. You can make less money and still be a decent person.

Unfortunately, the root cause is not within our power to control. As long as Uncle Sucker keeps on paying people not to work, we can expect these pathologies to continue - and worsen. Incentivize bad behavior, and you get more of it.

8
Local Politics / Re: McKay vs Scarpelli debate
« on: October 15, 2014, 01:21:02 PM »
See Baltimore city council member Rikki Spector.

But just because it might not be a legal issue doesn't mean it couldn't become a political issue. Kelly Moran's residency has come up with regard to her possible political ambitions.

9
Local Politics / Re: McKay vs Scarpelli debate
« on: October 15, 2014, 01:09:59 PM »
Can Councilwoman Wagoner legally continue serving on the council if she is living in Clear Spring?

Most likely.

Maryland courts have taken the position that a candidate lives where they say they live. Baltimore politicians have been caught living all over the place - in a different council district, out in the county. If they can point to a house they own or even a room in a family member's place in the district, the courts have let it slide.

10
Local Politics / Re: McKay vs Scarpelli debate
« on: October 13, 2014, 01:31:42 AM »
This race is not so black and white as the numbers would have it. Scarpelli will do well in Allegany County, and he is making more headway in Washington County than McKay would like people to think.

Care to make it interesting?

What's the spread?  :D

Hmm... McKay -13?

11
Be nice to see some feature stories about these neighborhoods where most of the crime is taking place. It would be interesting to see articles in which neighbors and area business owners are interviewed, the crime rate and individual crimes detailed, etc.

Such stories can do a lot to shed light on what's actually happening that allows or encourages criminal behavior.

Agreed!

12
Local Politics / Re: McKay vs Scarpelli debate
« on: October 10, 2014, 10:41:19 AM »
This race is not so black and white as the numbers would have it. Scarpelli will do well in Allegany County, and he is making more headway in Washington County than McKay would like people to think.

Care to make it interesting?

13
The Queen City sure did live up to her ranking last night!! Especially with the battle royal on MD Ave. Stabbing to the chest, someone with head injuries and someone getting cracked with pipe. Yeah crime is on the decrease...... :o

What I would like to see is some media scrutiny of these cases. The crimes get covered, but often not the resolution.

Let's see a story six months from now when this guy gets nol prossed, or gets a year of probation.

14
Local Politics / Re: McKay vs Scarpelli debate
« on: October 09, 2014, 03:07:52 PM »
The grapevine is telling me that Delegate Meyers and Commissioner McKay had a "falling out" and that Delegate Meyers is no longer actively supporting MM.  Anyone else hear this rumor?  Or is it all rumor?

I just heard LeRoy on the radio in a McKay ad, so I guess so.

15
Local Politics / Re: Term Limits
« on: October 09, 2014, 03:06:54 PM »
Hey!

I hate the player and the game. :)

16
Allegany County Discussion / Re: Building by DQ
« on: October 09, 2014, 10:07:09 AM »
We're upset that a business is opening?

17
Local Politics / Re: Term Limits
« on: October 08, 2014, 11:56:31 PM »
I can't vote for Barack Obama for a third term, or for a 28-year-old for senator. A century ago, I couldn't have voted for senator, period. The franchise has always been restricted in one form or another.

There's a reason the word "democracy" doesn't appear in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the Declaration of Independence, and it's because the Founders rightly believed that untrammeled democracy is a threat to natural rights. Limits on democracy are restrictions on the state, not the individual.

But aside from the philosophical case for term limits, there is a practical one: Elected officials get to decide how they are elected. Ballot access, redistricting. campaign finance rules, election dates, polling places... Incumbents are not impartial to their own political survival. They can and will use the power of the state to keep themselves in office. The foxes are guarding the henhouse.

Yes, the law is what the law is.......but do you agree that government should be able to restrict your ability to vote for the President in 2016 if that was your choice.  Do you agree the government should have the power to prevent you from voting for a 28 year old Senator? 

I think you're right that under the Constitution term limits could be imposed........but you so frequently appeal to a higher belief system when debating what is right and what is wrong in the relationship between citizen and government. 

It is just odd to me that on this issue you would fall on the side of government imposing limits on citizens when there are no natural rights being violated by their simple act of voting for whom they choose.

Like I said, I don't think of it as limiting individuals but as limiting the state.

If state power is a gun, then the constitutional restrictions on policy are the way we aim the gun, and restrictions on democracy are the way we control who gets to hold it. When democracy and natural rights conflict, natural rights win.

I am not following your thinking here.  I don't see how term limits are a restriction on the state, as its wheels turn whether Freshman Phil or Rich Slickrobber occupy a chair in the House.  They are a restriction on the citizens' freedom of choice at the ballot box as to whose butt is in that seat.

Voting isn't a private act, it's a public one. Our system has all sorts of limits on what people can do acting publicly - because you're aren't doing it to yourself or a consenting adult, you're doing it to every citizen. When we struggle for the gun in November, it gets waved around at me and everyone else.

What you are arguing sound to me like a version of "individuals don't know enough to make good decisions, so someone smarter than them should help them out by limiting their choices in the voting booth."

You don't seem to accept that argument when the people making the restrictions are entrenched officials making sure the system is skewed to their benefit.  So why agree that ballot access should be limited to meet your expectations of what is "good" and "bad?"  It seems equally skewed, just in the direction of limiting the amount of time a person can be chosen by their peers to represent them.   It is much more practical to limit government, by limiting government, not limiting who people can vote for in free elections.

That brings us to who this "we" is you mention is?  It doesn't sound like "we" are the sum of individuals being allowed to vote for whom they please.
   

People generally do make a lot of bad decisions, but we cope with that by limiting the impact of those decisions (as laid out in Federalist 10 and 51). Term limits would be of a piece with a bicameral legislature, federalism, separation of powers, the guarantee of a republican form of government, and all the other restrictions that our system places on the will of the people.

'We' is the same we, but we have agreed to restrict ourselves. Sort of like putting your credit cards in the freezer. :)

Also, I still don't see the conflict between democracy and natural rights in a discussion over who is qualified to appear on the ballot.  How does choosing to vote for an 8-term Congressman prima facie violate someone else's natural rights?

It doesn't, any more than instituting a unicameral legislature, abolishing the states, or any number of other alternative means of organizing the government. It's just a question of which arrangement best protects natural rights.

18
Local Politics / Re: Term Limits
« on: October 08, 2014, 10:44:49 PM »
This would be using government force to restrict the sovereignty of the people to elect whomever they wish to represent them.

Yes, it would. The entire American political system is based on the idea that there are things the people cannot be allowed to do - throw all the Jews in prison, confiscate everyone's firearms, etc.. We are not - and God willing never will be - an unfettered democracy.

You don't see a small difference between throwing all the Jews in prison, confiscating firearms, and allowing a legislator to serve a third term if elected?

The relaxation of limits on democracy has coincided with an assault on our natural rights.

Just look at the guy who inspired presidential term limits:


19
Local Politics / Re: Term Limits
« on: October 08, 2014, 10:40:53 PM »
I can't vote for Barack Obama for a third term, or for a 28-year-old for senator. A century ago, I couldn't have voted for senator, period. The franchise has always been restricted in one form or another.

There's a reason the word "democracy" doesn't appear in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the Declaration of Independence, and it's because the Founders rightly believed that untrammeled democracy is a threat to natural rights. Limits on democracy are restrictions on the state, not the individual.

But aside from the philosophical case for term limits, there is a practical one: Elected officials get to decide how they are elected. Ballot access, redistricting. campaign finance rules, election dates, polling places... Incumbents are not impartial to their own political survival. They can and will use the power of the state to keep themselves in office. The foxes are guarding the henhouse.

Yes, the law is what the law is.......but do you agree that government should be able to restrict your ability to vote for the President in 2016 if that was your choice.  Do you agree the government should have the power to prevent you from voting for a 28 year old Senator? 

I think you're right that under the Constitution term limits could be imposed........but you so frequently appeal to a higher belief system when debating what is right and what is wrong in the relationship between citizen and government. 

It is just odd to me that on this issue you would fall on the side of government imposing limits on citizens when there are no natural rights being violated by their simple act of voting for whom they choose.

Like I said, I don't think of it as limiting individuals but as limiting the state.

If state power is a gun, then the constitutional restrictions on policy are the way we aim the gun, and restrictions on democracy are the way we control who gets to hold it. When democracy and natural rights conflict, natural rights win.

20
Local Politics / Re: Term Limits
« on: October 08, 2014, 07:50:33 PM »
I can't vote for Barack Obama for a third term, or for a 28-year-old for senator. A century ago, I couldn't have voted for senator, period. The franchise has always been restricted in one form or another.

There's a reason the word "democracy" doesn't appear in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the Declaration of Independence, and it's because the Founders rightly believed that untrammeled democracy is a threat to natural rights. Limits on democracy are restrictions on the state, not the individual.

But aside from the philosophical case for term limits, there is a practical one: Elected officials get to decide how they are elected. Ballot access, redistricting. campaign finance rules, election dates, polling places... Incumbents are not impartial to their own political survival. They can and will use the power of the state to keep themselves in office. The foxes are guarding the henhouse.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 201