*** Liberala länkar ***

The outcome of the doomsday marketing technique is driving people away from the message of liberty, not towards it. Buying gas masks, guns in mass, and other extreme measures are not going to win the hearts and minds of those open to our ideas but hesitant due to the extremist (doomsday) vision many in the liberty movement profess.

If non-libertarians view us as terrorists or anarchists (i.e., Galleanists, Occupy movement, or Timmy McVeigh), then government will grow, not shrink. Our movement will not be the savior of liberty but the deliverer of tyranny.

Don’t misunderstand my message. I think preparing for the future is a worthy undertaking. Learning to use a weapon as the last resort of self-defense, having extra canned goods and water on hand in case of emergency or hedging the value of your savings by purchasing some gold, Bitcoin, Aussie dollar, etc.– all these things have merit as a form of insurance.

Stockpiling gold, guns, and gas masks to prepare for the collapse of the U.S., something that will take centuries to complete and only historians will recognize, is a waste of time and resources. Time and resources that would be better spent by promoting our ideas and encouraging people to join our movement, not out of fear but out of hope.

Of course, I could be wrong and the one in a million apocalyptic vision could come true. In the meantime, as an anarcho-libertarian, I’ll try to enjoy life and spread the virtues of liberty to all who will listen…without carrying a gun or wearing a gas mask.

http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/05/05...erty-movement/

Som tur är har inte den här survivaliströrelsen kommit till Sverige som i USA, men läsvärt ändå.

Att kunna det mest basala, typ att kunna lista ut vilket håll norr är åt, att ha en sovsäck och några burkar mat och en armekniv i bilen om vintern, är ju bara vettigt. Det är sorgligt när folk dör när 20 min och nån hundralapp hade räddat livet på dom. Men att lägga ner hela sitt vuxna liv och hela sin förmögenhet på att bli självförsörjande, köpa guld, vapen och bränsle är att överarbeta det väldigt mycket.

Jag skulle inte ha nåt emot om folk började tänka lite mer på överlevnad, men det borde inte bakas in i nån ideologi. Och speciellt inte dras till en sån extrem.

Framförallt framstår man då ännu mer som en farlig galning! Det är illa nog att tycka att staten borde läggas ner.

Man bör alltså göra sånt där i hemlighet om man nu känner sig tvungen att göra det alls.

Läs datta, om ni orkar, det kräver kraft. Så förstår ni varför frihetskampen är mer aktuell än någonsin.
http://blog.brokep.com/2012/07/04/ri...sningsansokan/
och som lök på laxen.
http://blog.brokep.com/2012/07/04/ri...sningsansokan/

Samma länk två gånger.

Edit: Länken handlar dessutom om ett citat som är lösryckt ur ett sammanhang. Utan hela uttalandet och hovrättens dom är det ointressant.

Någon som känner till några bra liberala tumblr-bloggar? Finns en del "anti-conservative" vilket jag kan stödja men läser man dom så är det bara socialister som skriver, som visserligen stödjer mänskliga rättigheter men propagerar för Obamacare och dissar en renodlad marknadsekonomi. Tvi vale!

Bara undrar, varför just tumblr?

Calle Kabo hade en tumblr-blogg men har nu gått över till posterous. Väl värd att länka till ändå:

http://kabo.posterous.com/

So, why does cronyism occur? In my paper, entitled The Economics and History of Cronyism, released today by the Mercatus Center, I cite two factors: government power over the economy and the discretionary power available to particular government officials. If there was ever a doubt that this connection existed, consider this study from MIT, which shows that in the days following the leak of Tim Geithner's appointment to Treasury Secretary, stocks of firms having any pre-existing connection to him jumped by about 15 percent. Clearly, the market expected firms that were connected to Geithner to do better, all other things equal.

So what’s wrong with this cozy relationship between business and government? It’s not just that cronyism takes wealth from the less politically organized to give to the more politically organized, but also that this taking and giving destroys wealth. For example, when the government bails out its cronies (think former Treasury Secretary Paulson and AIG), it destroys wealth in several ways.

First, by taxing people to get the bailout funds, it reduces the incentive for taxpayers to be productive. Even if the bailout is financed with borrowed funds, borrowing now means higher taxes later. Additionally, business risks are transferred from companies and banks to the taxpayers footing the bill.

Second, by giving money to companies that can’t make it on their own, the government diverts capital from where consumers want it used to where the government wants it used. As we’ve seen in the case of Solyndra and so many other subsidies, the government doesn’t always hit the mark when it comes to good investments.

Finally, when politicians dispense special privileges to certain businesses, a vicious cycle ensues: Businesses put their financial resources towards currying favor with politicians rather than investing those resources in their product and their customers. In short, the government doesn’t do a very good job of picking winners and losers. As Lawrence Summers, Obama’s former economic adviser once said, “...the government is a crappy [venture capitalist].”