ie8 fix
Click Here

Modern threats to American liberty

By | July 4, 2009, 4:55pm PDT

Cash, currency and coins, is a store of value. In the US, “legal tender for all debts, public and private.” Carry too much of it though and you are marked for suspicion (per the Wall Street Journal]:

Steven Bierfeldt, treasurer for the Campaign for Liberty, a political organization launched from Ron Paul’s presidential run, was detained at the St. Louis airport because he was carrying $4,700 in a lock box. . . . TSA screeners quizzed him about the cash, . . . then summoned local police and threatened him with arrest because he responded to their questions with a question of his own: What were his rights and could TSA legally require him to answer?

How about former Senator Bob Dole who habitually carried a wad of $100 bills? When federal regulators spotted his large cash withdrawals his bank filed “suspicious activity reports” questioning whether he might have violated federal laws against money laundering.

Multi-millionaire New York Governor Elliot Spitzer’s large cash withdrawals led a shadowy anti-corruption unit to his use of a prostitute - and to his resignation. As if a multi-millionaire is a likely candidate for money-laundering or bribery - but he did anger a lot of bankers. Hmm-m.

As money launderers see automated cash-tracking programs follow ever smaller sums, they open more accounts and make even smaller cash transactions. Which brings the breath of suspicion closer to all of us.

Where does it stop?

Not legal tender
Oh, and you know those lines about “legal tender for all debts, public and private” on our currency? Scratch that.

The Denver-area E-470 toll road is going entirely cashless - requiring drivers to use transponders - or pay higher fees when a bill arrives in the mail. That follows the Dallas-area President George Bush Turnpike’s earlier abandonment of a cash lane.

Another thought: divorce lawyers and others are accessing electronic toll road records. It isn’t just the Internet where you have no privacy.

California has anonymous FasTrak accounts. Top it up with cash - oops! you’re toast, buddy! - and away you go.

The Storage Bits take
As we enjoy this 4th of July, where Tom Jefferson once lauded those “. . . for opposing with manly firmness. . . .” invasions on the right of the people, let us remember that many Americans would not sign a petition with the text of the Bill of Rights. Too radical.

Your laptop can be seized for no reason when entering the US and its contents freely searched for - well, anything. Just as carrying a large amount of cash is now suspicious, a 64 GB thumb drive could soon make you a suspect.

Social totalitarians want to control our bodies and our lives, invading doctor’s offices, churches, ATMs and toll booths. Cheap massive storage makes it possible. Only patriotic Americans - liberal and conservative - insisting on their rights stand in the way.

It would be nice if social totalitarians on the Supreme Court would take to heart the original intent of the 9th Amendment:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by corporations the people.

In the meantime, for Steven Bierfeldt, who resisted the TSA’s illegal questioning, and the ACLU and others who defended him, 3 cheers.

Courteous comments welcome, of course. Update: A reader wrote in to ask why I had included a struck-out word in the 9th Amendment. Was it an accident or ??? My response:

“Corporations - legally, immortal “persons” capable of amassing great wealth and power - were not part of the American landscape in 1776 or in 1789. We as a people have ceded vast powers to corporations with very little debate on their role in American life. That is, in my view, a threat to liberty almost as grave as that presented by an unaccountable government.” End update.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Robin Harris has been messing with computers for over 30 years and selling and marketing data storage for over 20 in companies large and small.

Disclosure

Robin Harris

Robin Harris is a president of TechnoQWAN, a consulting and analyst firm in northern Arizona. He also writes StorageMojo.com, a blog which accepts advertising from companies in the storage industry, and has a 25 year history with IT vendors. He has many industry contacts, many of whom are friends and all of whom he has opinions about. Robin has relationships with many companies in the technology industry. Every company he writes about may have sought to influence his opinion through carefully-crafted marketing messages and self-serving white papers, gifts ranging from desk calendars, t-shirts, lunches and trips as well as analyst or consulting assignments. He also invests in some technology companies. He may accept payment for services in stock as well. Robin discloses financial investments in or client relationships with companies named in Storage Bits. To help readers sort out the gold from the dross in his writings, Robin tries to communicate his reasons as clearly as he can. If you agree, you are intelligent and discerning. If you disagree, well, you disagree. In all cases, Robin encourages readers to subject everything they read, see or hear on the internet or from politicians to some simple questions: * What assumptions are implicit in the world view and judgments of the author? * What, if any, is the factual basis for the opinions the author expresses? * Is it reasonable, logical and clear? Your critical faculties: use ‘em or lose ‘em!

Biography

Robin Harris

Harris has been messing with computers for over 30 years and selling and marketing data storage for over 20 in companies large and small. He introduced a couple of multi-billion dollar storage products (DLT, the first Fibre Channel array) to market, as well as a many smaller ones. Earlier he spent 10 years marketing servers and networks. After leaving corporate life he founded TechnoQWAN, a consulting and analyst firm. He also developed StorageMojo into one of the top storage industry blogs.

Robin writes, consults, coaches and lives among the mountains of northern Arizona.

151
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

Precisely right--and that sacrifice goes back a very long way.
Irritated_User Updated - 27th Jul 2009

"That's how we said it to the families of each previous veteran who did not return alive, and retreat now would dishonor and trivialize their sacrifice."


...And it goes back a long way too--to WW-ll and WW-l and further.

If, today, one stands in Arlington or in the D-Day cemeteries of Normandy or in Luxembourg (cemetery of the Battle of the Bulge) or numerous others elsewhere, besides being overwhelmed with appalling sadness and grief, one gets a terrible feeling that their enormous sacrifice could be in vein if the US and other western societies do not get their act together.

Clearly we need The State but one that's fully under control of the citizenry--not that of corporations, bureaucrats, politicians, self-opinionated do-gooders and carpetbagger lobbyists as it presently is. In the modern world it is very difficult to stop The State encroaching in on almost every conceivable activity--even just through its governance role let alone any intentional malevolence, vested interests or through an over reaction to external threats.

Ever-increasing law is akin to a creeping paralysis on democracy. Citizens should view every new piece of legislation or regulation with considerable suspicion. Remember, every single bit of security, terrorism, invasion of privacy etc. law that is enacted is one less bit of liberty you--the citizen--have.

Whether you're a liberal or a conservative the challenge of fixing up The State is very complicated and vexed. Moreover, the widening divide between liberal and conservative thought is making matters considerably worse. Those who promulgate this divide ought to be publicly ostracized.

We desperately need a mechanism of revising and setting new limits on State power. These must be defined with great care and precision (given today that many seek to distort older constitutional wording). We citizens--and only we citizens--not corporations or lobbyists et al--need to clearly and unequivocally redraw a line in the sand, one side defining the extent of State power and authority and the other that of citizens' rights and concomitantly the extent of their duties and responsibilities.

Thence an all-embracing covenant would bind The State and its citizens. A quintessential aspect of such a covenant would stipulate in no uncertain terms (and reaffirm constitutional notions) that The State is and always will be subservient to its citizenry--to it only and no other entity whatsoever.

A pipe dream it might be, but I believe a noble one.


_____


P.S.: Today, these ideas might be off the rails but they're not new, they've occupied many a great mind over the years:

http://freedomkeys.com/vigil.htm


0 Votes
+ -
Freedom ain't free after all...
jtiner 4th Jul 2009
That is why it is important to defend all of our freedoms, from the first to the last.

Remember, the second amendment is the one that gives you the freedom to keep the others.


0 Votes
+ -
Very worrying
nizuse 4th Jul 2009
See the movie (can be torrented) "The End of America" and see how freedoms get systematically attacked. From within. Not from some dopehead cave dwelling longbearded women hater.

Also notice the parrallels with the dismantling of democracy and the use of fear as a weapon in the period 1925-1940 in Germany.
0 Votes
+ -
Hmmm
stano360 7th Jul 2009
What about the massive power grab by government? Another parallel. The vilifying of Christians (the new Jews) caricatured throughout the MSM, strikingly similar to portrayals of Jews in Nazi Germany.
0 Votes
+ -
I agree.
nizuse 16th Jul 2009
nt
0 Votes
+ -
And the First...
Llantha 5th Jul 2009
allows you to tell people about the Second. I use my NRA membership to protect my right to own an ACLU card....
0 Votes
+ -
Yeah its too bad.....
OhTheHumanity 6th Jul 2009
the ACLU only comes to the defense of certain politically motivated cases. Great in theory, but when you have politically motivated people calling the shots, it becomes corrupt, just like the unions. Its a shame that good honest people don't run most of the things that should be good and honest including our politicians. Its all just a wasteland of the buddy system, not the rights of the people.
The ACLU defends against the abuse of power by those in power. This
may appear to stack against a party that has been in power for a long
time, but you can see a shift now that the balance of power has shifted to
the democrats. Now it is the new administration that is being sued.


0 Votes
+ -
You have got to be kidding!
stano360 7th Jul 2009
No one that has watched the activities of the ACLU for it's entire history would consider it remotely balanced. That is complete nonsense.

Have they defended conservatives before, yes. But, their suits defending liberals, liberal ideologies and an "flexible" view of the constitution are far more frequent.
0 Votes
+ -
The aclu was started by communists
katrillionaire@... 11th Jul 2009
to destroy freedom, not protect freedom. The aclu has done more to destroy freedom than protect it and except for a few token cases, further their communist agenda.
0 Votes
+ -
Freedom has never been free
wayoutinva 6th Jul 2009
Its always been paid for in blood and usually lots of it...
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Freedom has never been free...
burtrjt 6th Jul 2009
And as awful as it was...those who perished on 9/11 were the next installment towards the never ending balance we owe for our freedom. If you think about it, the terrorist took advantage of our freedoms to perform their acts of cowardice and in typical "enlightened" fashion we knee jerked our way into the patriot act, what can only be construed as illegal wiretapping, and all the other "security" measures adopted since. I don't know how else it could have been handled but perhaps freedom is worth the risk of suffering a 9/11 every once in a while. How do you say that to someone who lost a loved one though? Al-Queda's victory is all but secured unless we reverse course VERY soon.
0 Votes
+ -
The first word in Freedom is free!
brianpeterson@... 6th Jul 2009
Al Qaeda took advantage of not so much our freedom to move, but our civility and social courtesy. Scum like they will always be a threat, and the more we bend to their debased ignorance of personal dignity and freedom by molding our society to their model of intolerance and totalitariansim in the name of some God, the more we will destroy our society.

How different are those who proselytize we are a Christian nation? We are not! We are a civil nation which tolerates all views of religion and philosophy that do not impinge on the freedom of another to think differently, nor impinges on another's right to do so while such beliefs do not bring harm to another fellow citizen or impinge on that other citizen's liberty.

That's how we said it to the families of each previous veteran who did not return alive, and retreat now would dishonor and trivalize their sacrifice. CArry cash if you wish. You are harming no one.
0 Votes
+ -
Inspiring Message
lenhorne@... 7th Jul 2009
The truth is in you. Thank you for sharing.
0 Votes
+ -

"That's how we said it to the families of each previous veteran who did not return alive, and retreat now would dishonor and trivialize their sacrifice."


...And it goes back a long way too--to WW-ll and WW-l and further.

If, today, one stands in Arlington or in the D-Day cemeteries of Normandy or in Luxembourg (cemetery of the Battle of the Bulge) or numerous others elsewhere, besides being overwhelmed with appalling sadness and grief, one gets a terrible feeling that their enormous sacrifice could be in vein if the US and other western societies do not get their act together.

Clearly we need The State but one that's fully under control of the citizenry--not that of corporations, bureaucrats, politicians, self-opinionated do-gooders and carpetbagger lobbyists as it presently is. In the modern world it is very difficult to stop The State encroaching in on almost every conceivable activity--even just through its governance role let alone any intentional malevolence, vested interests or through an over reaction to external threats.

Ever-increasing law is akin to a creeping paralysis on democracy. Citizens should view every new piece of legislation or regulation with considerable suspicion. Remember, every single bit of security, terrorism, invasion of privacy etc. law that is enacted is one less bit of liberty you--the citizen--have.

Whether you're a liberal or a conservative the challenge of fixing up The State is very complicated and vexed. Moreover, the widening divide between liberal and conservative thought is making matters considerably worse. Those who promulgate this divide ought to be publicly ostracized.

We desperately need a mechanism of revising and setting new limits on State power. These must be defined with great care and precision (given today that many seek to distort older constitutional wording). We citizens--and only we citizens--not corporations or lobbyists et al--need to clearly and unequivocally redraw a line in the sand, one side defining the extent of State power and authority and the other that of citizens' rights and concomitantly the extent of their duties and responsibilities.

Thence an all-embracing covenant would bind The State and its citizens. A quintessential aspect of such a covenant would stipulate in no uncertain terms (and reaffirm constitutional notions) that The State is and always will be subservient to its citizenry--to it only and no other entity whatsoever.

A pipe dream it might be, but I believe a noble one.


_____


P.S.: Today, these ideas might be off the rails but they're not new, they've occupied many a great mind over the years:

http://freedomkeys.com/vigil.htm


0 Votes
+ -
Our freedom will be past history if We the People allow the Project for a
New American Century (PNAC) to get away with the Pearl Harbor that they
acknowledged they needed (the 9/11 attacks) in order to get us to accept
the Iraq war (as a preparation for the Iran war) and the Patriot Act. However, I don't notice that all supposedly freedom-loving Americans
are doing much about it.

If Americans had the gumption to react to the fraudulent 2000
Presidential 'election' like the Iranians just did to theirs, there would have
been NO 9/11, Patriot Act, Dept. of Homeland Security, reversal of Posse
Comitatus, or any of the other such long-term goals of PNAC.
0 Votes
+ -
We didn't have to do anything
Dr_Zinj 7th Jul 2009
Realistically, our reaction to 9/11 (the Patriot Act, Department of Homeland Security, the Iraq War) did absolutely nothing to improve our total security as a nation.

It spent unfathomable amounts of tax payer's money, indebted the tax payers with an entire generation of increased taxes to pay for it, made a very select group of shadow business people insanely rich, gutted american civil liberties, and destroyed the good reputation of America world-wide.

If we had only tightened up border security (by realistic audits and inspections), and required common database sharing by and between existing intelligence and law enforcement departments, and restricted our foreign military adventures to old rooting out confirmed Al Qaeda operatives and strongholds, we would have just as much security without owing most of America to China.
0 Votes
+ -
9/11 the perfect scapegoat
lenhorne@... 7th Jul 2009
What about the boys who died in vietnam, or from a global perspective, what about the 2.3 million Vietnamese that were killed, mostly colaterally. It is our selfishness and me-first atitude that has helped the Rich (corporations) take (over) the poors' lives - Bin Laden is a millonaire.
0 Votes
+ -
missing the point
burtrjt 7th Jul 2009
We have been referencing the technologies being used today to monitor American civilian's behavior and movement. Many of those technologies have been deployed as part of the Partiot Act, IRS actions, Secret Service functions etc. etc. etc. since 9/11. Vietnam was perhaps our last great effort to defend freedom from tyranny while 9/11 has been used to enlist tyranny in the name of security.
0 Votes
+ -
The Beauty of the American system
WiredGuy 6th Jul 2009
Any policy can all be undone almost as easily as it was enacted. Remember, every seat in the House of Representatives is up for grabs every two years.

Forty-five days after the September 11 attacks, with no debate, Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act. The act was specifically designed to take away as many freedoms from American citizens as they figured they could get away with. It exists today, almost intact, from those fear soaked days following the attacks.

Before you vote for your preferred candidate running to represent your district in the federal government, let them know how you feel about government spooks reading your email, tracking your spending habits and listening in on your phone calls without oversight. (Who knows, some of you might actually like it?)

Just when was the last time your contacted your Congressman or Congresswoman? They are waiting to hear from you. They know that you can fire them in November of 2010.
0 Votes
+ -
It is all part of a pattern...
aalhc5@... 4th Jul 2009
Alexander Hamilton was quite opposed to the Bill of Rights, not because he thought it was extreme, but because he thought it was silly to ban the government from taking actions which it had to power to take to begin with. He, and our founding fathers, designed the constitution to provide 'narrow' powers to the federal government. Since the Supreme Court decided long ago to stop keeping the Federal government to those powers...it has naturally taken considerable power.

Restrictions of use of cash are but one method to control how we behave (to force us to use electronic banking, which can be easily traced). The required questions included in the Decennial census go far beyond the authority granted in the US....the only reason is that they want to know more about us. Our entire tax code is designed to alter our spending habits (i.e. buy homes, reduce gas usage, buy fewer cigarettes). OSHA controls every facet of our work lives, and has gone far beyond workplace safety.

And the kicker, something that is even worse that the supposed 'cap and trade' legislation or nationalized healthcare (which are in a basic form solely a way for the government to control our lives) we could end up with federally mandated gps trackers in all vehicles http://www.mcclatchydc.com/nation/story/71078.html

Thomas Jefferson, wise beyond his years, knew that the natural form of a government was to perpetually ask for and take more power. He hoped that three competing branches would result in them perpetually taking power from each other (yet prevent them from taking it from us). By any standard that strategy has failed...in my opinion largely because Americans have stopped advocating for their freedoms and are willing to give them to anyone who says they will protect them (either physically or economically) regardless of the long term consequences.

I shed a tear every night for our country....because this story Robin shared is but one small symptom of a gigantic problem. I just hope the country realizes it is a problem before it is late.
0 Votes
+ -
Just one quibble...
snberk341 5th Jul 2009
While I mostly agree with your points, there is one
where I think you are wrong. When you arrive at an
international border - any border - you are not yet
in
that country, and therefore whatever rights and
freedoms that exist in that country don't necessarily
apply.

If you are a non-American arriving at the US border, at
best you are protected by whatever treaties extend
between your country and the US. At worst, you are
protected by whatever international law may apply - if
any exists at all.

If you are an American arriving at the US border, then
you are protected only by whatever rights the US
demands other countries to show American citizens.

Do border guards meet those minimum standards of
respecting visitor rights?

As a Canadian, I have to say that I feel I have more
rights in my daily life than my American cousins. For
example, last December when we were flying home
from New York City, the Americans on board (and not
the Canadians) were asked by US Homeland Security to
fill out an exit form. Last time I saw that I was in the
former Yugoslavia.
0 Votes
+ -
Ugg
People 6th Jul 2009
All the things my Grandfather warned me about are coming to fruition in my lifetime.
0 Votes
+ -
I see this as part of the instant gratification society that we have become. People will do anything, like give up their hard earned rights, to get something quickily in exchange. They are not thinking long term, and that is the problem. In the long run this is going to come back to hurt us quite bit. Once a right is lost, it is very hard to get it back.
0 Votes
+ -
Individual Freedom can't exist in a socialist society.
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 Updated - 5th Jul 2009
The speed with which socialist society is being built is amazing. The media is enabling it to a large extent by not reporting all the abuse while cheerleading all the wizbang ideas.

You can't have government run healthcare if people have the choice to not use it or pay for it. You can't have and control all energy use if people are free to ignore the mandate. You can't boil the frog and take away rights unless you have the massive smear machines (moveon, acorn, MSNBC, etc). You can't enforce the cars that people are authorized to purchase if you let the manufacturers make what they want. You can't control and tax everything if people are free to challenge or question the Al Gorified science. Hence the EPA suppression and the massive all out attacks on any scientist who dares question God Gore.

It's truly astonishing. As a Canadian who left 12 years ago,moving to Texas, the speed with which the entire country is socializing is astonishing. It took Trudeau many many years (when the US and Canada diverged, Canada when heavily towards social policy in the 70s) to accomplish what Obama and the the massively funded left activists are trying to do in less than a year.

The only good thing, I suspect it will backfire. I defy Obama to tell Texans they are not ALLOWED to sell their home unless the pay the "Gore Tax" (read up on cap and trade). I dare him to try to make Texas pay for the states that are entitlement havens. Try to take our Guns and keep telling us God is dead (God can't be allowed, the Government must be first for everyone) and trying to tell us how we are allowed to believe in God, you will see what people who believe in freedom will say.

I doubt he realizes that the basic motto of Texas is "Live your life so long as you don't bother me". Keep trying to stir the nest with your "idea" of what a society should be.

Guess what, if people knew who I was, I would be audited, I would be on multiple watch lists, I would be "investigated" illegally in multiple ways and if I had ANY power or influence, MSNBC and move on would be on my life a pit bull on a roast, all because of what I wrote above. It's shameful.

All freedoms are challenged constantly, forcing the weak to "give up".

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
Was Alberta home?
snberk341 5th Jul 2009
Just speculating... was Alberta your home before moving to Texas? I
will admit to stereotyping, a bit.

I think its too simple to categorize society problems as "caused by
socialists" vs "caused by free-marketers"

It is easy to have a "free" society" when any one person's actions has
virtually no impact on the wider community. Do you have the "right"
to sh*t into a river if someone takes their drinking water downstream
from you? Do you have the right to pour pollution into the air, if
someone else is breathing the air?

In today's world we are finally recognizing that everyone is
downstream or downwind of somebody else - everyone's actions
impacts someone else's interests, even if its not immediately obvious.
The whole point of society is to create a framework that allows
groups
of people to live together, hopefully in a way that allows
that society to continue indefinitely.

If may be possible for a few people to live with no net impact on the
environment.... but for the vast majority of people its not possible. So
we have rules set by the community that try to balance personal
freedoms against societal good.

Personally, I don't think its the environmental movement Americans
have to be wary of.... its Homeland Security.

ps I moved to Canada from the US about 40 years ago.... still have
family and connections in the US. You couldn't pay me to go back.

pps Not to TripleII, but to follow on comments: There is a difference
between "Socialist Societies" as defined by dictators, and "Socialist
Societies" as defined by democracies. The first is a dictatorship, plain
and simple, regardless of what the dictator (and Fox News) may
choose to call it. The 2nd is a community that actually works well.
0 Votes
+ -
There is no difference actually
Takalok 5th Jul 2009
There is a difference between "Socialist Societies" as defined by dictators, and "Socialist Societies" as defined by democracies.

No, socialism by any name is a police state. There is no difference.

Oh, BTW, my "community" and I have decided your socialist views are too upsetting to be permitted any longer. So we've decided to censor your viewpoint. And to make sure it doesn't recur again, you will be required to take a "capitalist sensitivity" course to make sure you don't re-offend.

Yes, I mock, but while you lean on the so called "argument of the commons," I point to the very real trend toward controlling thoughts and beliefs. That is the end of socialism - not environmental happiness. The desire of Obama and socialism in general is absolute control - especially of what you think and believe.

Now, I'd be interested to know how my thoughts and beliefs are polluting your water.
0 Votes
+ -
.... of which label they chose to name themselves. Police states can
call themselves democracies, and even go through the motions of
holding elections. Socialism merely defines who owns the property
that is considered to be for the common good. Communism defines
that ownership of all (or virtually all) property is held by the state.
Socialism is somewhere in between total private ownership and
communism. You should look up the definitions sometime.

A good chunk of Europe, Canada, and some others have thriving social
democracies. Yes, we give up some personal freedoms, but so do
Americans in other ways. We tend to be healthier, happier, better
educated, and for 99% of the population, richer.

I understood your sarcasm.... or was it irony? Honestly, I can never
tell. I don't feel polluted, or offended. You have your opinions, and
even if I think you are wrong, you aren't affecting me. I chose to come
here and read your writing....

Just out of curiosity, what do you think about the right-wing
commentators on their "news" shows who bully and shout down
people who don't agree with their right-wing views? Personally, I
believe that one of the disadvantages that the left leaning parties have
is that they spend so much time listening to every singe opinion, and
debating the merits of each - that by the time they get a coherent
platform together, the very efficient authoritarian right-wing has
already enacted an action plan and has the election wrapped up.

Oh well, viva la difference (le difference? - You'd think I'd know, eh?)
0 Votes
+ -
A gilded cage
Takalok 6th Jul 2009
A good chunk of Europe, Canada, and some others have thriving social
democracies. Yes, we give up some personal freedoms, but so do
Americans in other ways. We tend to be healthier, happier, better
educated, and for 99% of the population, richer.


Actually, from a statistical viewpoint, not anecdotal, I'd say you're drinking the Koolaide. The stats are clear - if you want to be healthy, happy, well educated and rich, there's only one place to be (or was only one place to be) - the U.S..

Besides, I'd rather have freedom than health care, or public education, or high taxes, or some idiot bureaucrat deciding when what I have is "too much" and taking whatever portion strikes his fancy and giving it to some train wreck of a life.

And I'd rather have freedom than Al Gore heading up Nuremberg-style trials for those of us who think Cap & Trade is a thinly disguised road to socialism.

You may be enjoying your gilded cage, but a cage it is nonetheless.
0 Votes
+ -
Blinders on, eh?
snberk341 Updated - 6th Jul 2009
First, let me say very clearly that my intent is not to slam the US. My
intention is merely to refute unfounded comments that state wrong
jingoistic information. The US has a lot to admire, and it has it's
problems like any nation. My target here though are Americans who
blindly believe that the US is the best at everything, and that other
systems and countries are therefore inferior.

The US is not even in the top ten for health care.
According to WHO the US ranked 37th in 2000 (the last year the WHO
did a ranking). See
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html for the list, and
http://www.who.int/whr/2000/media_centre/press_release/en/ for
the report. Other reports put the US in different ranks, but never first.
These reports compile average age of death, infant mortality rates,
general health of the population, access to health care, etc. Only in a
few areas does the US rank at or near the top. Treatment of prostate
cancer is one of them.

Americans are not the Happiest, according to several studies. New
Economics Foundation lists the US at 19th on the scale.
http://www.socyberty.com/Sociology/World-Happiness-
Rankings.116999, and the University of Michigan lists the US at 15th
on the "Subjective Well Being" scale, and not in the top 5 on Happiness
scale. http://www.thehappinessshow.com/HappiestCountries.htm

Education. Not in the top 10, again. See this site for a summary of
several international studies. http://www.dailytrojan.com/news/u-s-
falls-in-education-rank-compared-to-other-countries-1.212897

Wikipedia lists the US at #6 on the GDP per capita scale. What is
interesting is that since wealth is so concentrated in the US - if you
took away the top 1% wealthiest individual you are also taking away
between 30% and 42% of the wealth (depending on how you count).
So, unless you are in the top 1% of wealthy Americans, you are
actually farther down the list.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capi
ta
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

As regards freedoms. I don't have to undergo security screenings to
enter public institutions, with only a few exceptions, mostly in Ottawa.
I was screened several times when entering several public buildings in
NY City.

I have the freedom to not have my elections decided by a court.

I don't have my government monitoring my international phone calls.
My government isn't running a jail in Cuba to avoid legal protections
otherwise provided. And, I can buy Cuban Cigars - and even travel to
Cuba if I want. Except that I can't book my ticket to Cuba on the
Canadian Expedia, because its owned by an American company, and
American law won't let it sell tickets to Cuba despite the fact that it is
legal for Canadians to travel to Cuba.

I won't ever go bankrupt due to healthcare costs. Not a single
Canadian bank has failed since the Depression, so I'm free to not
worry about my life savings. I will never be turned down for
healthcare because I can't afford it. I have the freedom to change jobs
whenever I feel like it, and not because I'm tied to a insurance plan.

I don't have to fill in immigration form to leave the country.
Last Christmas, on a flight out of the US American citizens were asked
to fill in a form by Homeland Security.

There may be some abuses in the welfare safety net, but the vast
majority of people getting welfare do so legally. Because of the safety
net, they don't have the same pressures to turn to crime to survive.
The US has the highest incarceration rate in the world, about 1% to 3%
of the population, depending on whether you count probation and
parole. China, that centre of socialism, has a rate that is 1/5th of the
US rate. That is real smart, take a first time offender and toss them
into the only peer group that is going give its approval to the crime. It
boggles the mind.

So, I respectfully submit, the koolaid is being drunk by someone else.
0 Votes
+ -
Just a tip.
  • Flagged
0 Votes
+ -
Simplicity
People 6th Jul 2009
If I understand what I'm reading here, I think it boils down to a very simple conclusion.

In Canada and Europe, the soft tyranny of socialism is acceptable by the people, and by you.

In the US it is not acceptable, hence this discussion, because the soft tyranny is arriving.
0 Votes
+ -
Americans...
Jkirk3279 6th Jul 2009
We Americans ARE the best at everything, with one exception.

The French have us beat when it comes to Arrogance, and there's no
denying it.

Which is why I hate the French.


In everything else, Americans rule !

The Texans are the world's best liars.

The Alaskans are the world's craziest isolationists.

Iowa grows the most corn.

Maine has the most blueberries.

California has the most nuts.

America has some of the most corrupt politicians in the world, and the
most right-wing, conspiracy-believing religious lunatics per capita of any
country.

It's only Arrogance where we fail, and I blame the Minnesotans.

They're nearly Canadian, after all. If they weren't so polite we'd have a
chance against the French.



0 Votes
+ -
socialism...
gerhardgehrmann 6th Jul 2009
There is a profound difference between a socialist democracy and a socialist dictatorship...indeed in may be impossible to have a socialist dictatorship at all - it would simply be a dictatorship.

You demonstrate your profound ignorance by claiming that all socialist states by definition are police states. When comparing the powers of the police in Canada with those in the USA, the USA is a police state. From what I can see from north of the 49th, the USA is rapidly becoming a fasicst state like Nazi Germany, or El Duce's Italy, or Franco's Spain, and yes even like Stalin's Russia.

The rule of law is gone in the USA. Gitmo, Iraq torture, aggessive war, rendition, patriot act, illegal domestic spying, illegal wire taps, show this to be so (all REPUBLICAN actions).

The USA is neither socialist or democratic - it is a military industrial oligarchy. Democracay in the USA is as much a sham as it was in the German Democratic Republic. Just because you call something democratic doesn't make it so.

The United States has a proud but ignored history of democratic socialism (closest to the NDP tradition in Canada) in radical places like Milwaukee. Obama's compromised wimpy "moderate Democrat" (i.e., Eisenhower Republican) policies have nothing to do with any kind of socialism whatsoever.
0 Votes
+ -
No, Ontario.
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 5th Jul 2009
All in, my final year there, between PST,GST, Income tax,provincial tax (54% of Federal), property taxes, gasoline taxes and I still smoked back then, I kept 27c on the dollar. Not one aspect of your life is not regulated or controlled or scrutinized. It was demoralizing. I like Canada, I have family there, but I won't ever go back. That's where it leads. You work for the government and you get an allowance or you work for yourself and pay for infrastructure and protection.

Here's the difference. 7 years into my career, 12 year old car and 1 bedroom condo, left the country with $9K. 12 years down here, flirting with about 60 times that net worth. One of the final straws, I am an electrical engineer and had to actually go fight city council to be ALLOWED to rewire my condo when I put in a whirlpool tub. They tried to tell me it is illegal to do your own wiring. They said it's for "safety", but it's simply make work spread the wealth rules. I then actually had to threaten to sue Ontario Hydro before the inspector (who came back 3 times) would approve the wiring.

I hope people are looking forward to not being allowed to sell your home until you pay for new Energy Star appliances, new double glazed windows, a mandatory home energy audit certificate, proven R30 in the attic, and anything else they want to.

Note: I am all for anti-pollution and energy saving, anything that cleans up the environment, I'm there, I am just opposed to the current level of stupidity and powergrab going on.

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
Some more examples.
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 5th Jul 2009
24 bottles of beer, $37.50
http://www.thebeerstore.ca/Beers/pricelist.asp?str=&id=0651&brandname=CANADIAN

Note also that you can ONLY purchase beer at a government run store. What's a 3 hour wait in line during the holidays?

Still smoke, silly rabbit. $70-$95/carton.
http://www.cctc.ca/cctc/EN/tcrc/multimedia/tcmultimedia.2009-02-23.4875501052

Gasoline, price equivalent to US gallon, $3.80/gallon
http://www.torontogasprices.com/

Oh yeah, you want alcohol, you have to go to a government liquor store and pay 3xs what American's pay.

13% of every already beaten and taxed dollar that is in your allowance is then clawed back by the government.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080701191810AAi6R2F

NOTE: Some things are exempt, like Milk, not up to date on the list,very little was exempt when I still lived there.

Seriously folks, how do you think Canada pays for healthcare and one in 4 people on some type of social assistance? That was the rate when I left, no idea what it is now.

TripleII


Undergraduate student fees at McGill University, an internationally top
rated school which attracts many international students. Not quite
$3,800 CDN. This includes most if not all of the miscellaneous fees
universities like to tag on.

My monthly medical insurance bill, $54. I have had no problems
finding a doctor. I get appointments when I want to. I get medical
tests as I need them. Luckily, I haven't needed many. Someone I
know is going through a very serious medical issue. Numerous
doctor's visits, diagnostic tests, more doctors visits, and recently
surgery. No extra charges.... no waiting. Plus, the fares for her and
escort to travel on the ferry from their community to the specialist
hospital are covered. Largest single source of personal bankruptcy in
the US? Lack of, or inadequate, medical insurance.

I can take a job, change jobs, quit my job without ever having to
worry if my family is going to need the medical insurance an employer
may or may not have. That's why Canadians move more than anyone
else in the world - because we can. That is what I call personal
freedom.

You'll appreciate the irony of this example.... Tim Hortons is moving
back to Canada. A couple of decades ago Tim Hortons was bought by
Wendy's Burgers. Several years ago, Wendy's sold Tims off, and it
stayed an American company. This year.... they have decided to move
back to Canada - to save on corporate taxes.

I wish I had the link, so dismiss this if you want. Several years ago the
BBC did a study, and discovered that a child born in Canada had a
better chance of improving the economic situation they were born
into, than a child born in the US in similar circumstances. The BBC
attributed this to the "social assistance" that gave people a 2nd
chance. Yes, it can be abused. But for the most part it provides
people an opportunity to avoid descending into a life a crime to
survive. I'll try an find that link again.

I have to admit, I like being able to buy beer in a grocery store... it
makes sense. BC has opened up liquor purchases, so now private
liquor stores are common. But, no beer in grocery stores yet.
0 Votes
+ -
I don't doubt it.
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 Updated - 5th Jul 2009
American corporate taxes are pretty high. So the solution is to raise them while raising the price of everything. Healthcare in Canada costs $5,170 per person per year. You pay for it through your income taxes, into a system that is inefficient because it is government run. 18 months, time for my Dad to get his first cataract fixed, 14 months after that until the second. My health insurance costs $3100/year and includes dental and eyeglasses, two things not covered in Canada. To have the same performance levels in Canada as you have in the US, your insurance would cost $10K each per person per year. The rationing and delays are a consequence of not enough money, even at $5200 per year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada

On the school front, you pay for it in taxes in Canada, or you pay for it yourself down here. My example still stands, losing 73c on the dollar while having subsidized schooling loses to keeping 74c on the dollar and paying for it yourself down here. That's the key tenet of socialism, EVERYONE pays no matter if you use it or not. Now, yes, top Universities cost a lot of money, but the innumerable community colleges to get your undergraduate degree, less than or about the same as in Canada. Not everyone goes to Harvard, lol.

The best system is one where two things are true. It would combine the best of the Canadian System and the Best of the US system. Both are broken for many.

1) If you have insurance, you are covered. Pre-existing conditions are irrelevant, and if you are in perfect health and 25 year old female, you pay the same as a 25 year old with diabetes. This is by law, per age/sex/smoking/nonsmoking, you have flat tables.
2) You purchase said above coverage from private corporations, with NO plan offered by the Government.

If you are low income, the government pays for your coverage. Problem solved. 47c of ever $ spent down here is wasted in the adversarial system of deny deny deny. Close to the same is wasted up there in so many levels of government bureaucracy that it can take more than a YEAR for a doctor to be payed for the procedure he gave you.

This FORCES private companies to be proactive. If you are covered, they WILL actively promote prevention. They compete on prices and services. No more small print. The benefit to Canada, no government agency is capable of efficient AND quality at the same time. They have no reason to be be both, employees are NOT responsible for remaining in business.

All that aside, taxes, user fees, and the innumerable rules and regulations and how you will live your life ran me out of Canada. If you are happy giving up "some freedoms" for the common good, that's great, and in Canada, they are generally pleasant about it. Here though, it is being rammed down all of our throats.

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
You make some good points.
snberk341 5th Jul 2009
I agree that an "efficient government agency" is an oxymoron. In BC
they are experimenting with what are called P3 's Public Private
Partnerships. Its good in theory. The government pays a private
entity to provide a service, and the private entity is bound by a
contract that specifies performance levels, etc. In theory its a good
one, and in some cases it works well. But the good results are the
exception.

Vancouver Airport is run by a P3, and it does very well. The public is
happy. The airlines seem to be happy, and of course the government
is happy since they are no longer throwing money at the operation.
However, the YVR (the private company named after the airport code)
is happy only because they were able to leverage their existing YVR
investment into winning contracts to manage a bunch of airports
around the world.

The problem with putting a private entity into the public realm is that
in order to maximize their profits - which is their mandate - they
have to take risks. If it works out, great.... everybody is a winner. If it
doesn't, then the government loses by having to step in, and the
public loses by not having a service provided. The experience with
P3's in BC is that private companies are not interested in the
partnership unless the government takes on all the risk - and the
company gets the profits. The few partnerships that the BC
government have signed have all ended badly (YVR is a Federal
operation). Since none of the private entities had any downside to
taking risks, they all did - got paid out - left the mess with the
government. Or they cut so many corners to maximize the profit they
get fired.

I think there are better ways to structure the deals, but I'm not being
consulted, so I can't say for sure.

Regarding your dad.... I'm sorry to hear about the delay. But I too
have had cataract surgery (don't watch an arc welder without eye
protection - but I was a kid at the time and didn't know better). My
operation was done quickly, in weeks. I do agree that there is
rationing - but it is getting better as people pushed back. Your dad
may have had to wait, but at least he got an operation. Something
that too many uninsured people don't get.

I don't agree about the bureaucracy in the medical field statement.
The Seattle paper, and the Vancouver Sun did a joint report on the
medical systems in the two cities, which are demographically almost
identical. The huge surprise to the Seattle reporters was that a
doctors office in Vancouver didn't have a billing clerk, that the
receptionist also collected all the payments. That a hospital in Seattle
spent something like 10% to 15% of its budget running a billing and
accounting department, and the Vancouver hospitals were at about
the 2% range. In the Seattle Hospitals, every single item - single
bandaids, kleenex sheets, masks, had to be accounted for,
inventoried, and billed to either a department or a patient. I've just
come from dealing with friend's hospital stay. When she was
discharged, they wheeled her out. That was it. No paperwork, or bills.
I'm not sure how that is bureauracraticaly inefficient. By the same
token she has extended health insurance from her employer, and
despite that she was covered for a semiprivate room, none was
available. As in, didn't exist for that department.

My wife, who works as a public policy analyst, and spent years
working for the government on the homelessness file agrees with you
(so do I). It is really stupid to not cover dental and eyeglasses, even
just basic coverage, with health insurance. Bad eyes and teeth are a
barrier to unemployment. Also, since they are covered by welfare you
are encouraging people to not take entry level jobs since once they do
the dental and eye-care benefit loss is more than the extra money
they could earn. So, they stay on welfare.

Its not a perfect system.

In Utah, it is not legal to collect the rain that falls on your roof, unless
you also own the sub-surface water rights to your land. I just read an
article in the NY Times about several states that are in the process of
changing these rules, but Utah is not one of them. Now that is
government control.... and it goes back a century or so. Socialist
states aren't the only ones who take too much interest in people's
lives.
0 Votes
+ -
Fascists and Socialists - on both sides
williamacole@... 6th Jul 2009
People make reference to fascist and socialist without even understanding the meanings.

Socialism is government ownership of the means of production. The Nazis were National Socialists.

Fascism is government control of the means of production. Mussolini's Fascist party would "allow" you to maintain ownership, but would institute control.

In practice, however, there is really no difference between the socialists and the fascists.

Just as there is no difference between the so-called extreme left and right, there is no difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Bush got us into the Iraqi war on a lie, according to Dick Cheney and Obama lied when he promised to get us peace. Both participated in government bailouts. Both of 'em want you and I under their thumb, as Mick Jagger would say.

War is health of the state, as Ranolph Bourne used to say. It's a great way to increase control and taxes, as Thomas Paine would say. And as Milton Friedman would say, it's a great time to suck the wealth right out of the money.

The bright side is that if it gets bad enough, maybe "the people" who the DC pirates claim to serve, will stand up and say "Enough!" I say, "Enough is enough!". TANSTAAFL!
0 Votes
+ -
Canada : 40 years ago
partman1969@... 7th Jul 2009
You probably ran from the draft. You coward!
0 Votes
+ -
If socialism isn't taken too far to mean
whatever 'society' as a supposed 'whole' wants
is the only thing considered.

It's only when socialism is TAKEN TOO FAR that
people start to have their rights taken away
from them, and frankly..... we have moved
damned well closer to that latter thing in the
CONSERVATIVE administration that just left
office than we EVER have under a Democratic or
left-leaning government.

As to 'entitlement havens'.... you need
slapped! No state is an 'entitlement haven'. In
every state today you are only allowed to be on
welfare for, at most, 5 years..... unless you
have a medical condition that TOTALLY prevents
you from working period.

Lastly, Obama is simply stating what most
people in this country believe a society should
be: a society where NO ONE is looked down on or
seen as being 'less worthy' of good pay because
they are 'less educated', a society where
everyone can get health insurance for a
REASONABLE PRICE (which is only going to come
by NATIONALIZING health insurance and having
ONE PAYER), etc.
0 Votes
+ -
California.
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 5th Jul 2009
A state with record revenues, lots of resources, bankrupt and there is no doubt the current administration wants to find a way to have the more fiscally responsible states pay for their excess. Now, one truism of government at the local, state and federal level, every single time they are in session, they whittle away at people's rights. Be it Conservative or Democrat. It tends to happen slowest when conservatives are in power.

In Canada, you have Conservative, Liberal and NDP (the bigger one's, ignore the Bloc from Quebec). Conservative is middle-right, middle left depending on economy. Liberal is middle left to middle very left depending on economy. The NDP are simply Liberal's in a hurry. Obama can be considered NDP in a hurry.

If it uses energy or you use energy, it is to be controlled. If it ever needs a doctor, it is to be controlled, if you dissent from the new order, you will be destroyed in the media. If you are in a union, you will be protected at the cost of everyone else who isn't. Think ANY of the "stimulus" money is authorized for non union labor? Think unions helped the auto-industry? We now have government control of the banks and government owned auto plants.

There is no "good socialism". There are many many good social programs, like education assistance, unemployment insurance, food stamps, etc, but real socialism equals suppression. It must, by definition, because if ONE person doesn't have to pay for Government Healthcare, others will follow. If ONE person can live unregulated, all can. Socialism ONLY works when you have no real freedom.

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
Free speech has far more constraints in Canada and several western
European countries. http://www.volokh.com/posts/1197260709.shtml

Socialist-minded Obama voted for the renewal of the Patriot Act, the
Real ID, warrantless surveillance (FISA amendments), all Bush
programs and all curtailments of liberty. On FISA, which Obama
promised to vote against as senator before voting in favor of, his now
Attorney General Eric Holder is instructed to stonewall any legal
attempts to challenge the widespread wiretapping of US citizens not
even suspected of crimes. Indeed, Obama is moving far faster than
Trudeau - he's the NDP's wet dream. Tom Ricks, who lambasted
Bush's lies in books about Iraq, stated that Obama had broken more
campaign promises on Iraq than anywhere else. It doesn't matter if
the tyrant is from the left or the right - both take away your money
and your power while claiming to do things for good.

Community is when people come together. Government is destruction
of community - it assumes people can't do it voluntarily, so coercion
must be used. One example of this is that in the US, individual charity
is still alive. Americans give tens of times more generously to the
needy than Canadians or Europeans, who haven't eradicated poverty
either with their top-down methods.

Frequently, though, other countries do better in specific areas - they
have far lower corporate taxes (US and Japan have the highest rates),
financial regulations are not so heavy (until recent years, US banks
could not be owned across state lines, while Canadian ones were
national, more diversified and so stronger.) The bottom line is that its
not US vs. other countries, its government vs. liberty, the collective vs.
the individual.
0 Votes
+ -
You
sackbut 6th Jul 2009
are an idiot of the first order.
0 Votes
+ -
it is why we enter into society
jdieter@... 6th Jul 2009
We enter into society to protect our freedom. What chance would you have of keeping your property, without an army to protect it? If you have no army, I and 5 of my friends will come kill you and take your property. So yes, you state the obvious, You CAN have Liberty in Society, but the opposite is also true: You cannot have liberty WITHOUT society (or, an army anyway) Government ABUSES their position as the protector of our liberty, and soon extends it to be our nanny.
Regarding Obama, and your comment about "nobody being looked down on... blah blah" tell that to the millions of Black men in jail because they smoked pot, or had a gun. (both protected freedoms under the Constitution) Tell that to the thousands being killed in AfghanIraq and soon Iran. Obama has continued EVERY single Big GOvernment Bush policy and Every single Bush war. NOT ONE thing has changed. Not foreign policy, not domestic. Two Big Commie Government parties. You can vote YES or YES to Nazionalization. What a choice!
0 Votes
+ -
Noble but fantasy
burtrjt 6th Jul 2009
Everything you just stated is counter to the very title of your post! Very simple really...substitute every $1 you pay in taxes with freedoms you forfeit. Because in an economy such as ours, money = power. No matter if it is good or bad, every edict, law, program, etc that is pushed down on us is an elimination of options. It is a reduction in our personal freedom. Canadians may love their national health care but it is an undeniable relinquishing of the freedom to choose what is best for yourself. Right now or at least until very recently Americans retained the freedom to choose. If we have a job and the insurance benefits are not what we like, we are FREE to find a different job with better benefits, or even start our own business and procure health coverage that suits our individual needs or any number of other options. Now we will simply forfeit an even greater percentage of OUR money so that the government can provide yet another service for us? Health care is a service btw and not a constitutional right. Welfare has FAILED, public education has FAILED, the postal service is an absolute FAILURE, Social Security has FAILED, the legal system has FAILED. Honestly I could go on and on. Virtually every single function that the government performs is a complete and utter failure and now you want to put them in charge of health care?
0 Votes
+ -
Socialism considers that it has a "right" to the
fruits of my labor for the sake of giving to
others. That is also, by definition, "slavery".
0 Votes
+ -
Silly
Economister 6th Jul 2009
The fruits of your labor come about in large part because of the society you live in and its infrastructure, in which you probably played no significant part. Therefore you need to return some of the fruits of your labor back to that society, which enabled you to grow the fruits in the first place.

If you want to keep it all, get a homestead, work the land, take nothing from anybody and be COMPLETELY self sufficient.

If you choose to live in a society, then you contribute to that society. If you live on a family farm or work in a family business, you help out to make the farm or business successful. If you live in a society, you help out to make that society successful. To many Americans do not seem to understand this concept.
0 Votes
+ -
In response to the "silly" comment. This is not about not supporting
the society where you operate, this is about fending off that society
from eating away your acquired rights. Why should you have to lose
autonomy? Why should you have to live under big brother watching
your every move? Notice the key operating word "should", instead of
"would". We are talking about an imposition, not the ability to opt in to
a system. And why is this being done in any case? To catch potential
terrorists / mob members / drug dealers? Sure, you may catch a few
uninspired ones with such a wide net, but for the most part, the
sharks swim elsewhere. If this is the best we can do, then we already
lost...
Remember, "Qqis custodiet ipsos custodes?" (who watches the
watchers?)

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix