Hypocrisy of the Left exposed

In 3:52, this guy succinctly exposes the hypocrisy of the Left.  Pro individual choice and freedom but only when it suits them.

This is why a philosophy that protects individual rights allows one to be completely consistent.  If it affects your rights as an individual, it is wrong.

H/T The Objective Standard

You didn't build that

You're right aren't you, Barack?  This little girl didn't build that.  Four more years?  Let's damn well hope not.

H/T The Objective Standard.

Student loan morality

Today's Mary Holm column has numerous correspondents complaining about the morality of exploiting the interest free student loan policy:

The dilemma of "to repay or reinvest" is morally and ethically bankrupt, and my advice to your correspondent is: Your son should repay his dues. Student loans are not a right but a privilege. The more they are abused the less there will be for future generations.

In my view, it would be immoral to not utilise the current student loan system to its fullest, in exactly the same way as it would be immoral to pay more tax than you were required to.  An individuals responsibility is to himself and his family, not to society as a whole.  Why would I voluntarily forego some of my own wealth to the collective, to the detriment of myself and my family?

The correspondents are also only questioning the morality of receiving an interest free loan when in their view it is not required.  I assume they are equally outraged by the middle class receiving Working for Families payments, universal superannuation and other transfers?

Oh that's right, it is entirely moral to confiscate the wealth from productive individuals to satisfy the "needs" of the collective.

Intellectual property rights

British American Tobacco are to be congratulated for their fightback against the self righteous individual rights violators pushing for plain packing of cigarettes.

Not only are individual's rights to pursue their own happiness being violated, but BAT's intellectual property rights are threatened to be stripped away.

The simple fact is smoking is a conscious decision by those undertaking it.  I am not in a position to tell them what to smoke in exactly the same way as I'm not prepared to be told what to eat.

I am a free individual who should be allowed to fill my lungs with cancer causing smoke or my stomach with heart disease inducing burgers.

And BAT should be allowed to advertise and sell their product to me, including utilising their intellectual property.

To be blunt, I don't give a shit about Johnny down the road killing himself with cigarettes.  It is his right to do what he likes with his body just as it is my right to do to mine what I like.

Back in the game

Cactus Kate's recent post about Watching Brief has inspired me so why not give this blogging another whirl?  Things have settled down a bit with RWD's son growing up into a wonderful little man who is gaining his independence.


No doubt there will be some posts about asset sales to come over the next few months.  For the avoidance of any doubt, I disagree with the partial sale of the power companies.  They should be full sales.

Goodbye cruel world...

...of blogging that is.

Mission accomplished with Don Brash taking over the ACT party leadership :-) Seriously, blogging while working and raising a small child, while also in the process of moving and selling two houses, is difficult. Something had to give!

Let's hope for the sake of the country Don can improve ACT's party vote and bring some backbone to National. ACT and National have basically the same fundamental principles (belief in the free market and for small government) so they should be entirely compatible. Could an Australian style long-term Coalition be in the offing?

Don has my vote. Please no walking of planks or trying to squeeze into stock cars.

RWD's prescription to reduce budget deficit

Bernard Hickey has had a go. Now it's my turn:

1. Scrap Working for Families, more accurately Welfare for Families. Low incomes can be targeted much better via different mechanisms. Why a family earning $60k with one child requires $5k pa of taxpayer subsidies is beyond me. 2010 appropriations of $2.2b (Family Tax Credit) and $0.6b (In-work tax credit) = $2.8b.
2. Scrap Kiwisaver member credit and kickstart. $1.1b.
3. Scrap interest free student loans. Would reduce amount of loans plus increase revenue. Net increase of $2b.
4. Sell Kiwirail. $300m pa reduction in subsidy.

These are the easy ones. Without much thought, the deficit will reduce by about $5b.

If the Government was really serious, benefits could be reformed into an insurance type scheme paid for by the employee and employer. Not only would this reduce the deficit, but employees would be far more engaged with their employment and plan for a life without employment. This would increase participation in life insurance, disability insurance and unemployment insurance. 50% reduction in unemployment benefits would result in $500m pa savings. The same can be done for health, education et al.

The government doesn't have to wipe or arse for us. We can provide for ourselves if we want. Health, education, unemployment and superannuation. All can be provided by individuals, instead of the government. The annual savings would be in the billions (>$10b if all options considered) and the increase in efficiency by introducing competition to these government monopolies would be immeasurable. The economy would be stronger. The populace freed from the cold embrace of the State.

I've just woken up from my dream and back to reality....