Libertarianism


Maximizing Government Revenue

Yet another novel approach to funding government:

On Tuesday, Blunkett will fight in the Royal Courts of Justice in London for the right to charge victims of miscarriages of justice more than �3000 for every year they spent in jail while wrongly convicted. The logic is that the innocent man shouldn�t have been in prison eating free porridge and sleeping for nothing under regulation grey blankets.

I’m kind of surprised he doesn’t want to charge these unlucky folks the full cost plus a little instead of a paltry �3000 but then the British may be able to house someone for much less then it costs in the US.
This kind of crap fits right in with things like forfeiture laws.
Via Samizdata and White Rose.


American Taliban

Is in action:

The FCC is seeking the maximum $27,500 for each of the alleged violations, or $247,500 in all, from a March 13, 2003, broadcast that included a graphic discussion about pornographic film star Ron Jeremy. Portions of the conversation were rebroadcast eight times in promotional spots for the show.

I’d change the station if this schlock came on and would not have Elliot in the Morning on in the first place. However, for those who want to tune in I can think of no justification for saying no.


Search and Seizure

Just in from Europe:

The European Parliament has passed the EU Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive by 330 votes to 151.

At passage, the law imposes civil penalties on counterfeiters, but amendments aimed at bringing in criminal sanctions for piracy, favoured by large media companies, were defeated, and a late-tabled amendment restricted the civil penalties to so-called professional counterfeiters, and not individuals copying music or films on an occasional basis “in good faith” for their own use.
… the directive does allow companies to raid offices, homes, seize property and petition courts to freeze the bank accounts of those they believe to be engaged in piracy.

Do they really mean “allow companies to raid…?” So now Vivendi, et al, hire their own enforcement arm to perform the function of the police?
Well, I’m going to look at this in more detail when time permits just to make sure what the article says is a reasonable translation of the proposed law. But, if it is even close to right then folks in the EU are in real serious trouble.
Via Nipper’s Patent Law Blog.


Where Does the Buck Stop Now?

Apparently it still stops in the Lincoln and other White House bedrooms:

Bush’s criticism of the Clinton fund-raising scandal is one of the reasons the White House identifies guests. In a debate with Vice President Al Gore in October 2000, Bush said: “I believe they’ve moved that sign, ‘The buck stops here,’ from the Oval Office desk to ‘The buck stops here’ on the Lincoln Bedroom. And that’s not good for the country.”
Bush’s overnight guest roster is virtually free of the famous � pro golfer Ben Crenshaw is the biggest name � but not of campaign supporters.
At least nine of Bush’s biggest fund-raisers appear on the latest list of White House overnight guests, covering June 2002 through December 2003, and-or on the Camp David list, which covers last year. They include:

Yes this bit of hypocrisy should be pointed out but no one should be surprised that bedsheets are traded for friendship or money.
First, you can pretty much count on the bush team either having done, doing or planning to do something they hammer the opposition about.
Second, and more important, the US government transfers huge amounts of money from the losers to the winners and the latter’s stripes change only modestly from administration to administration. Until we the people put a stop to the massive transfers we can expect politicians to seek favours votes and donations and reward those who give them with both bedsheets and favorable laws and regulations.
Via Calpundit who picked it up from It’s a Crock. The Apostropher also comments.
Update: John Cole and Mark Kleiman both argue that a Bush – Clinton comparison is off the mark and I acknowledge both their points which are different enough that you should go read their posts.
I will, though, stick to what I say in the two paragraphs above the ‘Via’ statement.


Ideological Purity II

As promised I retook the Libertarian Purity test. This time I tried to take on the persona of a libertarian minarchist: score 105. What I don’t know is whether this would meet Professor Caplan’s scoring for a minarchist since his grading scale is really based on perfection being a pure anarcho-capitalist.
Tomorrow, if time permits, I’ll be someone with libertarian leanings and a more practical view of the next 20-40 years.
Oh yea, Jim Henley discusses all of this a bit here.