Ed Hudgins

Michael - Social Security receipts go to the Treasury and the SS Administration gets IOU's on their books from the Treasury. The Feds spend it all and borrows 60 cents for ever dollar it spends. There is no Al Gore "Lock box" or account containing money that SS can draw on. Just IOUs. So if the Feds have have $100 in cash from all sources and must pay 50 cents for interest on borrowing plus 40 cents in SS benefits plus 20 cents for Medicare/Medicaid, plus whatever amount to cover everything else, the Feds will have to cut back on something.

Probably right. The political problem would be that Social Security checks would either not go out or would go out with only a percentage of their value. Of course, my complaint is that Republicans were too politically stupid to figure out how to confront Obama effectively. Early in the year they might have actually submitted budgets for the various government agencies to House committees, passed them on the floor and then sent them to the Senate, one by one. It would be tough for Senate Democrats to vote against an otherwise normal bill to fund Defense, Commerce, etc. Of course, the Republicans would hold back funding for HHS and Obamacare. Or the GOP could have done good grassroots work with all those losing insurance under Obamacare, especially in swing states with Democrat Senators. But politically, Republicans can be just so stupid.

Here's the link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2013/10/03/fox-news-poll-voters-support-obamacare-delay-disapprove-congress/

In the United States, the people are supposed to be in charge of the government. What do you think is happening today?" This recent national poll question yielded some surprising results. Listen in as Will and Ed discuss some of the ramifications and join the conversation by leaving a comment below.

Hudgins a headlines on HuffPost: Privatize The National Monuments: Well, It's One Shutdown Solution

Since I recorded this some days ago, Obamas Park Service has reinforced barriers at the World War II memorial to keep veterans and the public out. His Park Service has blocked off the parking lots at the privately owned and operated Mount Vernon home of George Washingtonwhich is open during the government shutdowneven though those lots are jointly owned by the Park Service and Mount Vernon. Obamas Park Service has even intimidated private concession operators around parks to close. What a nasty and vindictive piece of work occupies the Oval Office! Bet the veterans are disgusted that they fought and bleed for the likes of him.

Government Shutdown Lesson: Privatize the Monuments!

Drilling Down Into The Fracking Debate By Edward Hudgins And William R Thomas September 20, 2013 -- In this State of the Culture update, William R Thomas and Edward Hudgins examine the opposition arrayed against fracking and new scientific findings regarding fracking's impact. More State of the Culture updates: Religion and the American Republic: Why George Will is Wrong Republicans vs. Libetarians: Chris Christie Edition Crony Capitalists in Space? The IRS Scandal and the Tea Party Protests

Gulch8 – Sorry I forgot to mention Young Americans for Liberty. We have a similar partnership with them, though we’ve been more active with SFL. We obviously encourage students to read Atlas Shrugged and Rand’s other works. We also direct them to the wealth of materials on our website. Of special note, we have a relatively new Atlas University project that is producing videos on Objectivism. Check it out here: http://www.atlassociety.org/atlas-university We also have regular webinars open to anyone, but especially aimed at students. Here’s the link: http://www.atlassociety.org/objectivism_online_courses We’ll be launching a designed version of the website that should make it even easier for students to find materials. Hope you enjoy the material!

Gulch8 - I’ve been involved with SFL since the beginning. I’ve been at every international conference, often speaking, and David Kelley, Will Thomas, and Alexander Cohen have spoken there as well. I’ve also spoken at least three times at the regional conference in Philadelphia. This year, I’m speaking in Denton, Texas and at Berkeley, and Kelley and Thomas are speaking at events as well. We have a formal relationship with SFL by which TAS provides materials to interested students and campus groups. SFL is an excellent group, which went from a handful of folks less than seven years ago to an international conference that attracts at least 1,200. This is one of the bright lights on a dark cultural landscape!

FYI, on secession, Texans Could Vote For Independence In March. http://texnat.org/political-publisher/1956-texans-could-vote-for-independence-in-march-primaries

No. But, you can't keep punishing production by stealing from producers, then borrowing or printing money forever and get away with it. That's the math to say nothing of the morality of the matter. Manifestations and timing of collapse will differ from country to country. But we see in America, for example, businesses sitting on $1 trillion or more in capital because they don't want to expose it to Obama's ravenous ghouls. With the right policies America can be pulled back from the brink, but right now we're not on the brink of such a pullback.

One word: Greece.

PDS is on the mark. The Dems as well as a number of Republicans can hide their heads in the sand but objective reality will bite them in the butt. I’ll add concerning some other comments that the country is deeply polarized. A Gallup poll in 2012 found some 86 percent of Democrats approved of Obama’s performance compared to only 10 percent of Republicans, a 76 point difference that tied the spread concerning George W. Bush’s performance in 2004. Until recent decades I argue that most liberal Democratic Party officeholders tended to favor the system of private ownership of the means of production with economic decisions—what wages paid, what prices charged—determined in the market. Individuals had the principal responsibility to look after themselves and their families. But liberals also advocated a government social safety net to make sure no one ended up destitute, and government tweaking of the market. Today, liberals favor a cradle-to-grave welfare state with government controlling every aspect of life. That is what’s different from the past and why we’re in such perilous shape.

Yes, Sen. Harkin. It's A Civil War! By Edward Hudgins September 27, 2013 – Iowa Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin, in a speech about raising the debt ceiling, said, “We are at one of the most dangerous points in our history right now. Every bit as dangerous as the break-up of the Union before the Civil War.” On this point, he is absolutely right! But it is Harkin and his ilk, led by President Obama, who are tearing apart the Republic. Harkin aimed his remarks at Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz, who filibustered against the implementation of Obamacare, and against Cruz’s Tea Party allies. Harkin complained about “a small group of willful men and women who have a certain ideology.” He continued, “Since they can't get their way, they're going to create this confusion and discourse and hope that the public will be so mixed up in who is to blame for this, that they'll blame both sides.” But there is no confusion. Pandering power-hungry paternalist politicians like Harkin are to blame! I have been writing for some years that “America is drifting toward civil war … the conflict is between producers, those who work to earn their own way and prosper through their own efforts, and expropriators, those who survive by taking from others with governments as their agents.” Today, the contradictions of the welfare state—exacerbated by Obamacare, which gives the feds control over one-sixth of the economy—have reached crisis levels. As government entitlements and spending grow, deficits grow and governments seek more revenues from already over-taxed and over-regulated wealth-creators, further stifling wealth creation and creating yet more demands for government assistance. Right now the federal government borrows 40 cents for every dollar it spends. The national debt under Obama has gone from $10 trillion to $18.2 trillion, equal to the country’s GDP. And yet Obama, Harkin, and their cronies seek an increase in the debt ceiling so they can further bankrupt the country. Worse, such politicians, in their lust to loot, have spent their political lives fanning the flames of envy, damning prosperous individuals for the “sin” of prospering through their own efforts, and then demanding that they produce even more for the politicians to expropriate. And, too often, producers have been guilt-tripped into apologizing for being productive and prosperous, for their virtues. It is the paternalist politicians who have rebelled against the principles of individual liberty—“a certain ideology”—on which this country was founded: that we each have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that government should be limited to protecting those rights. It is these politicians who seek to make us all servile, to keep us dependent on their largess as they feed off a shrinking number of victims. But now the producers are waking up and standing up against the likes of Obama and Harking. Atlas is shrugging. And a civil war will only be avoided if productive individuals and those who have been made dependent on government by such politicians reclaim their liberty and dignity. ---- Hudgins is director of advocacy and a senior scholar at The Atlas Society. For further information: “Edward Hudgins, "Producers vs. Expropriators: America's Coming Civil War.” April 13, 2010. *Edward Hudgins, “America's ‘Civil War’ Debt Battle.” August 3, 2011.

You bombed with that one!

Odd is not funny. Then I am ordinary. Autumn breeze blows cold.

I find it odd that others find it odd that I find it odd that we’re having a long, odd discussion about whether or not it’s odd for me to discuss certain odd topics. Of course, I freely acknowledge that perhaps I’m the odd one for finding all of this odd! So don't take this odd exchange personally. Odd, isn’t it?

No need to apologize Michael. A nice thing about an open discussion board like yours is that individuals can express their opinions and others can judge whether those opinions--and perhaps the individuals!--are silly or not. On some other boards--can't remember whether it's occurred to me here--I'll post something, try to respond to interesting comments or valid criticisms, usually ignore silly ones, and then not return to the website for a week or two, very busy with other matters, Then I'll find someone has posted "So, Hudgins is ignoring my takedown of him! Here's sacred! He's defeated!" No, I have a life and do more than debate silly people online! Anyway, I'll be working on more commentaries and rest assured they'll find their way to objectivistliving.com!

On eugenics, read the review of Zubrin's excellent book, "Merchants of Despair," the second one in this double book review. (Read the first review as well!)

A chilling thought!

Concerning "don't give a crap," as I've noted on another thread, I find it odd that folks here on OL have started to comment on whether or not they think a topic should be commented on!

Global Warming And Reckless Precaution By Edward Hudgins September 20, 2013 -- The soon-to-be released Fifth United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report will admit that computer predictions for global warming and the effects of carbon emissions contained in previous reports were much too high. But this has not deterred European Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard from sticking to public policies meant to combat this shrinking problem, while she ignores the real and present catastrophic effects of those policies. She argues that "Let's say that science, some decades from now, said 'we were wrong, it was not about climate' [i.e., global warming is not a problem], would it not in any case have been good to do many of things you have to do in order to combat climate change?" Further, “In a world with nine billion people … at the middle of this century, where literally billions of global citizens will still have to get out of poverty and enter the consuming middle classes, don't you think that anyway it makes a lot of sense to get more energy and resource efficient?" But Hedergaard’s arguments promoting anti-global warming policies—even if there is no global warming problem—fly in the face of reality. Consider the assumptions of Hedergaard and all others who take the Al Gore party line on this issue: First, the atmosphere is warming up significantly. Second, this warming poses serious and highly probable threats to the health and safety of large numbers of people. Third, the probable benefits of warming—e.g., longer growing seasons—are minimal. Fourth, human activities are in large part responsible for the warming. Fifth, there are policies that have a high probability of stopping the warming. Sixth, the probable benefits of such policies will more than outweigh the probable adverse effects. All of these assumptions are highly questionable. And with the first assumption thrown further in doubt by the U.N. report, the others are even more problematic. But what is beyond doubt are here-and-now downsides to “green” and anti-global warming policies. Germany is phasing out nuclear power—even though it contributes far less to alleged global warming than fossil fuels—and substituting “green” energy alternatives. But an August 2013 article entitled “How Electricity Became a Luxury Good” in Der Spiegel, Germany’s top news magazine, reports that the renewable energy surcharge will increase the electricity bills for Germans by 20 percent, just to start; Germany already has the highest electricity prices in Europe. Germans also must cover the €20 billion costs of generating €3 billion worth of electricity via solar, wind, and biogas plants. (Gee, I thoughts Germans were good at math!) Further, the flow of “green” electricity can vary erratically depending on weather. Thus, German factories have been asked at times to shut down when the electricity supply didn’t correspond properly with use. Germany is recklessly, bit by bit, destroying its economy and harming its own citizens as precaution against an improbable future harm. The “green” policies of Commissioner Hedegaard and her allies will impoverish citizens of the industrialized world. And by substituting very expensive, unreliable “green” tech for reliable, cost-effective forms of energy production, they will hinder rather than help the impoverished billions to rise into the middle class. ---- Hudgins is director of advocacy and a senior scholar at The Atlas Society. For further information: *Bradley Doucet, “Why Are We So Worried About the Planet?” April 18, 2009. *Edward Hudgins, “Energy and Environment: The Moral Battle of Our Age.” August 8, 2008. *Robert Bidinotto, “Death by Environmentalism.” March 2004.

A few points: First, I choose the topics I about which I blog, not TAS. If you fine them interesting, great. If not, save your reading for something else. Second, I would think I don't have to argue that black communities are in atrocious shape and that this has been, for decades, one of the major problems in our country; 400,000 murdered black, mostly by other blacks, since King's speech is kind of a giveaway. Or spend some time in the slums of any major urban area: Baltimore, Detroit, St. Louis, LA, you name it. If this issue doesn't interest you, fine. But don't complain about those of us who understand the depth of this problem. Third, I'm not suggesting that those who object to my commenting on RFK Jr.'s diary entries are endorsing or not endorsing anything. I'm saying that their arguments for me ignoring the diary story--which is all over the media and web now--are too silly for me to fathom. I'll let them waste their time twisting their brains over this. Meanwhile, I'm off to finish another piece that I personally think is of interest. When I post it, read it or not. Your choice!

Your logic for why I should “blank out” about the RFK Jr. diary information that is now public, wipe this information from my mind, pretend that it does not exist, and thus ignore its crucial implications, is truly bizarre. I suggest that by your lights, even engaging with me on this thread about the matter is endorsing my low, tasteless and perhaps evil actions. So scat! Shoo! Off with you! And leave the adults here to discuss serious matters!