Tuesday, April 07, 2015

Kamarat McWashington's invitation is awaiting your response

 
 
Kamarat McWashington would like to connect on LinkedIn. How would you like to respond?
Kamarat McWashington
Kamarat McWashington
Assistant Store Manager at EZPAWN
Confirm you know Kamarat
You received an invitation to connect. LinkedIn will use your email address to make suggestions to our members in features like People You May Know. Unsubscribe
If you need assistance or have questions, please contact LinkedIn Customer Service.
© 2015, LinkedIn Corporation. 2029 Stierlin Ct. Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

Saturday, April 04, 2015

I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn

 
Kamarat McWashington
Kamarat McWashington
Assistant Store Manager at EZPAWN
Sioux City, Iowa Area
I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn.
- Kamarat
Confirm that you know Kamarat
You received an invitation to connect. LinkedIn will use your email address to make suggestions to our members in features like People You May Know. Unsubscribe
Learn why we included this.
If you need assistance or have questions, please contact LinkedIn Customer Service.
© 2015, LinkedIn Corporation. 2029 Stierlin Ct. Mountain View, CA 94043, USA

Sunday, July 13, 2008

In the world today, our politicians like to give us one word to describe why we should vote for them. I believe Ayn Rand called this the package deal. An example, is how people like to view selfishness as inherently evil. Selfishness is a concern for one's interest. Their is no moral evaluation built into the concept. It can not tell us if concern with one's interest is bad or good; that is the job of the philosophic field of ethics. Besides the package deal of "Climate Change" of recent, "we need change" spews out of almost every politician's mouth. Like a virus, it begins to infect everyone that it comes in contact with. Beware of the Change zombies.



The Politics of "Change"

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Free Trade, Outsourcing, and the New York Times

Some times you think the free trade message is not being heard. Well in the below article published for the New York times, we see that morally defended articles still make through for the free markets of Capitalism.

What to Expect When You’re Free Trading - New York Times

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Powered by ScribeFire.

Friday, May 18, 2007

Party of Principles vs. Party of Favors



In response to : Party of Principle - the Inherent Contridiction



I have always found it interesting and sad when people attack principles. Principles are general core truths that guide ones actions. One needs principles to guide ones actions. I have found pragmatism to usually entail that you make decisions based on individual situations with out regard to how that situation plays out in the context of the big picture or what the long range results of such actions are. When asked what should I do, the pragmatist answers, "What ever works for the range of that moment." The funny thing is we all need principles and that is the pragmatist's principle of action. In other words stealing can be okay depending on what the situation is, because stealing is not wrong as a principle of its own. It is only wrong depending on the situation. At least this is the normal view for a pragmatist. So smearing some libertarians as purist because they are principled is sad. A purist is someone that does not follow principles, but follows due to blind faith. Are their purist in the Libertarian party, you bet. However, their are just as many principled Libertarians. So what is the basic core principle that our Libertarian party should follow? It should be the protection of Individual rights which includes property rights. That the government's job is the protection of these rights and that the only moral use of force is to defend individual rights. That is the core principle. So the question is do you believe that in every situation that individual rights should be protected or do you believe that in some situations the individual's rights are null and void? If you say yes to the latter, here is an example of how not following principles leads you to the opposite of individual rights. Once you say there is exceptions, then you have to name who will decide on whether an exception is applied to a particular case. Now how do make sure that person is fair? We decide to vote on who is appointed this task. In the end result, it is some one that is voted in who decides if you have rights in a give situation. What you have here is not a right to do certain things, but a matter of permission to do certain things. Permission can be revoked and rights can not. Is this what you would call protecting Individual Liberty? Rights are principles that are necessary for individuals to prosper and live in a society. Is it these principles that you do not want the libertarian party to follow? If we throw our principles out the door so that we can have more influence- then we would not be any better than the republican or democratic parties. We would be a party of favors instead of a party of principles. As far as out reach, what attracted me to the Libertarian party was that they were a party of principle and their principle was protecting Individual Rights in all situations. Since the take over, I have with drawn my support for the Libertarian party. I am politically homeless again and will vote for the person that is more principled to Individual Rights. After all, if the Libertarian party's new principle is some times we follow individual rights and some times we don't, then how does one choose between the other candidates (democrat or republican) that some times votes for liberty and some times doesn't. This is why we need principles and a party that is principled. If not we divide our votes even more amongst all the parties.





numly esn 56082-070518-477959-26 Rate content:



© 2007 All Rights Reserved.











Technorati Tags: , ,



Powered by ScribeFire.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Why do we import certain things instead of make it ourselves?

Walter Williams has written a wonderful article on exporting Jobs  in comparison to importing certain goods like Cocoa. The interesting thing is that his example does not just apply to people losing jobs to overseas country, but also applies to jobs that are loss do to better competitors in the U.S. that create jobs for their companies, but cause people to lose jobs in other companies. The economy is always balancing itself out to improve the living standard of everyone as long as we have a free market. If not the benefits of division of labor would be crushed by government rewarding their friends while punishing their enemies. Click below to read Walter's article:

Trade Deficits and Exporting Jobs: Why Trade At All? by Walter Williams -- Capitalism Magazine

Technorati Tags: , , ,

powered by performancing firefox

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Pentagon taking a page from the government of V for Vendetta?

If ever there was a sign that we are headed towards Fascism. The pentagon starting a News Correction Unit? Let's say it together- "political censorship". Yes, it appears that is on the horizon coming to a town or blog near you. See the link below for more info:

Slashdot | Pentagon Reveals News Correction Unit




powered by performancing firefox