« January 2006 | Main | March 2006 »
The Black Star Pub?
BlackStarPub in the News Again
The event:
All told, the BSP's first big event worked well in spite of iffy weather, a warning from the Austin Police Department, a location I wasn't sure would comfortably hold a good crowd, and a last-minute dash to make sure we had enough beer. Those hurdles didn't prevent us from barely missing our fundraising goal and set us up with enough momentum to get started on our next event.
Cheers!
Via an ongoing discussion in the Anarchist Collective MySpace group.
No Doves Fly Here Wrote:Although he changed his point of few many times, he was still a racist at one point.
Once a racist, always a racist.
But just writing people off for a belief that can be directly, easily challenged with widely available facts is laziness.
You cannot simply wake up from your prejudiceness and see people in a new light.
Flint Wrote:It's not just an intellectual disease and a matter of individual perception and prejudice. It was a systematic state policy codified into law, with slavery, forced relocations, genocide, blood qantums, Jim Crow and segregation. It was a matter of state policy done for several economic, political and social reasons. With such a massive statist intervention into society, it's not suprising that the effect of such policies continue to reverbrate through society even a generation after formal segregation has ended.
For instance, as a free-market anarchist... I would think you would acknowledge that an awfully lot of capital was accumulated through the enslavement of blacks, and that capital was never effectively redistributed. While many of the slave ownes died off, many of the banks and corporations that benefitted from the slave trade continue on and some of the current capital was based on that past unjust accumulation.
I'll make a bold assumption: of the institutions that existed prior to 1950 and continue on today, many if not most (particularly in the South) engaged in objectively racist activity at some point...because the individuals in those institutions were racists, because the individuals in those institutions were afraid of reprisals by members in their community who were racists, or because the individuals in those institutions could profit from racist decisions. I do acknowledge the immoral manner in which so much of America's economic activity has a foundation of slavery.
What to do about it, however, is a thorny question.
Obviously, an advocate of free markets isn't going to have much ground to object strenuously to a voluntary transaction of capital from financial institutions founded before 1865 to verifiable descendents of slaves. It is possible (not easy, but possible) to determine of at least some of the value of the wealth stolen, apply a standard inflation function, and then contact the slaves' descendents and let them know if they want to accept it, they have money that belongs to them. If an anarcho-capitalist/free market anarchist mentions that the wealth under Citibank's control today isn't the wealth stolen from or made immorally off of slaves, I'd reply that if it is wrong to run a business off theft and if the just way to rectify that theft is to return exactly what is owed to the victim, then the same ought to apply to commercial institutions. Taking the plunder and then building upon it doesn't negate the duty to (at least) return the amount stolen to the designated heirs of the victim, even if the actual persons involved at the time are no longer alive.
Suppose Cousin Billy stole a watch from Aunt Sally and gave it to me as a gift. Knowing it was stolen or not, I gladly accept it and, years later, pawn it to create a certificate of deposit account at a bank. Billy and Sally die. Sally's will appoints her husband John as owner of her estate. He discovers that Billy stole it and gave it to me. It would therefore be his right to demand the value of the watch back, because it was never mine to begin with, which means the easiest way to rectify the situation would be to liquidate the watch's retail value out of my CD and transfer the funds to John. In addition, if I knew it was stolen, he'd be right to demand additional compensation for the evil nature of my act.
If the financial institutions refused a request from legitimate heirs for compensation, would they have grounds to take their request to court? I don't see why not, but they'd have to be ready to accept a mediated or arbitrated resolution as an option.
I can see that process as being in line with libertarian rights theory and a clear concept of justice. Would such a policy destroy the United States as it currently stands? It would kick off a massive churning of capital leaving few people untouched. I'd take that, however, over other statist proposals such as a special tax on all whites or state-funded freebies for several generations of African-Americans.
This seminar on praxeological foundations of libertarian ethics will consist of two primary lectures per day for five days, June 26-30, 2006, and includes discussion time with the professor. Morning sessions are 10:00 - 11:30 Central Time, and afternoon sessions are 2:00 - 3:30, Monday through Friday, with a pizza party following Friday's closing session.FURTHER DESCRIPTION
On the one hand, the subjective-value approach to economics characteristic of the Austrian school might seem inhospitable to objective theories of ethical value. Yet on the other hand, philosophers like Socrates, Aristotle, and Aquinas based their objective conceptions of ethics on something rather like a praxeological analysis of subjective valuation; indeed, subjectivist economics and natural law ethics both originated from this common tradition. Can an objective ethics in a broadly Aristotelian tradition be grounded in praxeological considerations? And if so, what shape might a radical libertarian political theory take if built on such foundations?
The first half of the seminar will deal with the praxeological foundations of ethics. Topics include: do human beings have an ultimate end? can we knowingly choose the bad? how are morality and self-interest related? why should we care about other people's interests?
For a preview of the sorts of issues to be addressed, listen to this lecture: Economics and its Ethical Assumptions.
The second half of the seminar will explore the implications of praxeological, Aristotelean ethics for such issues as property rights, contracts, land ownership, punishment and restitution, military policy, stateless legal systems, utilitarian vs. rights-based considerations, and the cultural preconditions of liberty.
[...]
The Seminar is open to full-time students (no charge for qualifying students). Registration is $125 for Mises Institute Members (click HERE to join, or to update your membership) and faculty, and $195 for non-Members. Registration includes daily boxed lunches, refreshment breaks, closing pizza party, transportation between the dorm and the Institute each day, and the use of Mises Institute research libraries and computers. You may register online. Dormitory rooms are available for $35 per person per night double-occupancy or $45 per night single-occupancy. For other Auburn accommodations, go here.
My birthday is June 26th and I intend on giving this gift to myself.
A falling coconut will kill any human standing underneath it. Water will kill you if you're stuck in it. It'll also kill you if you don't have any. The most dangerous thing about marijuana is that you can get shot by people with guns who have the license to do so by the people that haven't extended their political approval to certain plants.
| Defense | 221 (56%) |
| Foreign Affairs | 45 (11%) |
| Social Programs | 89 (23%) |
| Other | 39 (10%) |
That is the current poll on the News8Austin homepage.
I voted "defense" because if there is to be a government, then the only capability I'd be even remotely comfortable with would be national defense and I don't have the time to detail why even that is a hard sell for me. I could have cast a vote for "other" intended to mean, "the most important job for the federal government is to disappear/get out of our lives/quit en mass"...but I am well-aware that a vote carries no such detailed information, so why bother?
The current situation presents many ugly realities to individualists. One of them is the daunting task of keeping an eye out for the next statist cement truck bearing down upon you while watching for the ones already on their way. I first heard about the Trans Texas Corridor a few years ago as one of those they-ain't-crazy-enough-to-try-it stories, but I should have known that after a prominent mention in Rick Perry's 2005 State of the State speech, the momentum for the TTC had shifted significantly under my feet and a new threat had developed.
What is the TTC?
The Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that will incorporate existing and new highways, railways and utility right-of-ways. Specific routes for the TTC have not been determined.As envisioned, each route will include:
- separate lanes for passenger vehicles and large trucks
- freight railways
- high-speed commuter railways
- infrastructure for utilities including water lines, oil and gas pipelines, and
- transmission lines for electricity, broadband and other telecommunications services
Plans call for the TTC to be completed in phases over the next 50 years with routes prioritized according to Texas' transportation needs. TxDOT will oversee planning, construction and ongoing maintenance, although private vendors will be responsible for much of the daily operations.
A more accurate way it say it is a mammoth land grab (~580,000 acres / ~908 square miles) that will push aside rural Texans, an open-ended bonanza for outrageous corruption and legally-enforced privilege (I've read a conservative project estimate of $150 billion), and a concrete ocean riddled with unintended consequences for natural and economic environments on an astronomical scale.
To get an idea of how big this is, check out the state's interactive map and the two maps CorridorWatch's has posted: an Proposed TTC-35 Preliminary Corridor Alternatives interactive county map and a broader visualization of the direct impact facing south, central, and north Texans.
Thankfully, my parents moved away from the area in Comal/Guadalupe County (right where the "CA" box is located) that is under consideration. My immediate concerns are with Travis County, particularly because my girlfriend lives between Manor and Elgin. Tell me this wouldn't be unsettling for you if you lived roughly between them:
Six 12-foot Passenger Vehicle Lanes (80mph); 112-feet in aggregate width with shoulders.
Four 13-foot Truck Lanes; 84-feet in aggregate width with shoulders.
Two Tracks for 200mph High-Speed Passenger Rail. (All depots are contained within the corridor.)
Two Tracks for 80mph Commuter Passenger Rail.
Two Tracks for 80mph Freight Rail.
A 200-foot Utility Zone for large underground water lines, natural gas and petroleum pipelines, telecommunication cables and overhead high-voltage electric transmission lines.
Operational Maintenance Zone.
Safety Zones sufficient to accommodate future roadway expansion.
The big immediate threat is from eminent domain. I've written enough on this to avoid the necessity of warming it over again, so: Eminent Domain is Robbery, Corporate State Capitalist Fascism of Kelo vs New London, McCracken on Eminent Domain, Eminent Nonsense, and When Property Rights Advocates, Aren't. Despite their incalculable personal value, some Texans are going to lose their land and no matter what anyone else tells you, a "fair market price" is NOT established when the "buyer" threatens you with violence for not working with him.
Then there is the possibility of toll roads. Texas Toll Party has a page up on the TTC, mentioning that the project will almost double the number of tolled miles in the nation. The TTC-35 Comprehensive Development Agreement overview (PDF) says,
The Cintra-Zachry conceptual proposal included:Private investment of $6 billion to fully design, construct and operate a fourlane,
316-mile toll road between Dallas and San Antonio for up to 50 years as the initial segment of TTC-35Payment to the state of $1.2 billion for the long-term right to build and operate
the initial segment as a toll facility...
There's a lot of noise out there from people bitching about toll roads and in many cases they are right to be angry. However, in principle, I don't object to a private entity asking for a fee in exchange for its services or products. If Jack Schitt Roadways, Inc. legitimately acquires the land and builds the highways, they would be justified in requiring compensation of using it.
But these aren't private roads (PDF). In the above TxDOT document, this is stated quite clearly: The Trans-Texas Corridor is a state-owned project. It will be part of the state highway system and right way will be purchased in the name of the state. Texans already deal with a $0.20 gasoline tax ("the third largest source of tax revenue for Texas state government") that supposedly pays for the network of government roads.
The long-term impact is unknown. That may seem like a simple enough thing to acknowledge, but it cuts to a core issue. How do you predict what countless individuals will do when this gigantic corridor is built?
Will they take the extra time to drive to the nearest overpass? Will they reconsider their buying habits if getting to town becomes a bigger hassle? What will those affected by tolls do if the price for a single one-way trip rises above pocket change? How will the many small and quiet communities respond to a sudden influx of strangers as they build and travel the new roads? What could happen to local water consumption? How great will the change be in animal behavioral patterns as a result of the increase in noise and pollution? Where will chemical-laden road runoff go? How do you avoid the serious problems that arise when certain private companies are granted the privilege to operate facilities in the corridor to the exclusion of competition?
This could easily eclipse Boston's Big Dig in terms of socialistic waste, graft, corruption, and scandal. The nature of government necessitates it.
UPDATED 7/10/2006 11:20am
Ben Wear's Wily Hunt for Truth and the TxTag
UPDATED 2/28/2007 8:35am
Lois W. Kolkhorst has filed a bill to prevent this montrosity from moving forward.
I attempted to sign in to my Wells Fargo account to check a few things but right after I signed in I was presented with an "E-Sign Consent" form that said:
On June 30, 2000, Congress enacted the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E-Sign Act) to ensure the legality of electronic contracts. Before obtaining products or services electronically through Wells Fargo Online® or Wells Fargo Business Online® services (collectively "Online Banking"), you must read and indicate your acceptance of the terms outlined below.
I was then taken directly to ONLINE ACCESS AGREEMENT FOR WELLS FARGO ONLINE® AND WELLS FARGO BUSINESS ONLINE® SERVICES.
This monstrous bastard weighs in at over 11,000 words and it took up 19 pages in MS Word when pasted to a new document. Seeing how detailed it was, I decided to read over it and see what it said. Of course, this takes time.
And of course, when I finally finished and clicked "I have read and agree to the above conditions" the system had logged me out due to inactivity.
Do the policymakers and programmers at Wells Fargo expect everyone who faces this binding legal document to speed-read through it? Did they think most people just click "I Agree" without thinking about it? It sometimes takes me two or three 1-hour sittings to really read a 15 page publication during my lunch break and that's with material I actually look forward to reading...not 10,000-plus words of jargon and "ain't our fault if shit goes bad!" legal bobbing and weaving.
Bad form, man. Bad form.
Austin-American Statesman: Is it time for a new morgue?
Death is a growth industry for Travis County, so now it's time to decide whether to build a bigger morgue or tell outlying counties to take their autopsy business elsewhere.The medical examiner's office is already performing too many autopsies under standards established by the National Association of Medical Examiners, with about half of the workload coming from other counties. Population growth will only exacerbate the problem, a consultant told county commissioners Thursday.
Copyright 2001-2006 Cox Texas Newspapers, L.P. All rights reserved.
This has two elements in it, one good and one bad.
The Good
Many members of the community around a proposed strip club didn't want it to be built so they got the word out and put public pressure on the business to keep it away. Universal Media, the developer, decided to back down and withdrew its application.
The Bad
The opposition did not hesitate to ask the government to step in and stop things, a tactic that under any other circumstances would be no different than hiring pleasant-looking thugs to intimidate the business for you. Then there were the arguments they made against the strip club, most formulated around some claim of collective ownership of Universal Media's property.
Universal Media probably did the right thing to not open a business that would be known primarily for the local opposition to its existence. Any business in any socio-political environment must deal with that possibility. However, it remains true that the company had a right to build whatever business it wanted on the property it owned, whether the locals hated it or not and whether the state approves or not.
Th AP via News8Austin: Dewhurst, Craddick authorize use of funds for critical needs
Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and House Speaker Tom Craddick authorized use of the state and federal funds. The largest chunk will go to nursing facility services.Dewhurst and Craddick co-chair the Legislative Budget Board. They've been criticized for delaying a decision on how to spend $463 million culled from vetoed legislation in the 2006-07 budget.
Copyright 2006 Associated Press, All rights reserved.
I hold that it was never properly their money to begin with and not even in the capacity of a "representative" who supposedly works for us in our name. Ideally, all the revenue collected from taxes, permits, licenses, and fees would be returned to those who paid them. Since that isn't likely to be feasible, something else has to be done.
Should the money be equally distributed among all Texas residents? This would be the simplest way to address the problem, even though the logistics would be an expensive headache. However, it ignores the glaring issue of justice in that those who paid more than the average would get screwed while those who paid less (or, in the case of children, barely anything) would get a handout. Using an rounded-up estimate of 23 million Texans, breaking up $463 million evenly would net everyone a $20.13 check...but it's immediately obvious this is far less than what a typical Texan might pay to the state over two years (legislative sessions occur in Texas ever other year), let alone just one. That's probably one to two months' of gas taxes alone, whereas business owners might have to deal with thousands of dollars in yearly licenses and permits to continue operating.
Should the money get plowed into tax/fee cuts? This would be a way to lessen everyone's burden as well as weaken the state's grip on future generations. However, it instantly becomes a heated political brawl over what and how much to cut. Politically connected privilege-peddlers would seize the opportunity to curry favors and favoritism. Even if partisans refrained from spitting at each other and sat down to objectively assess the situation, the vast network of interconnecting taxes and fees would be a daunting task. Tweaking them means incentives change and behavior along with them, leading to unintended consequences. And it does nothing to address the previous instances of state extortion that lead to the extra money in the first place.
It's a good thing those bills were vetoed and the money not spent. It's a bad thing it's still in the hands of those bastards and there's no easy way to return it to whom it belongs.
Financial Times: US group implants electronic tags in workers
An Ohio company has embedded silicon chips in two of its employees - the first known case in which US workers have been "tagged" electronically as a way of identifying them.
I find this creepy.
CityWatcher.com, a private video surveillance company, said it was testing the technology as a way of controlling access to a room where it holds security video footage for government agencies and the police.
The technology's defenders say it is acceptable as long as it is not compulsory.
However, just because some specific situation would not constitute a moral crime (as compulsory RFID embedding would) does not necessarily make it wise, prudent, or effective.
Embedding slivers of silicon in workers is likely to add to the controversy over RFID technology, widely seen as one of the next big growth industries.RFID chips – inexpensive radio transmitters that give off a unique identifying signal – have been implanted in pets or attached to goods so they can be tracked in transit.
I know I hate it when the state treats me like that.
"There are very serious privacy and civil liberty issues of having people permanently numbered," said Liz McIntyre, who campaigns against the use of identification technology.But Sean Darks, chief executive of CityWatcher, said the glass-encased chips were like identity cards. They are planted in the upper right arm of the recipient, and "read" by a device similar to a cardreader.
"There's nothing pulsing or sending out a signal," said Mr Darks, who has had a chip in his own arm. "It's not a GPS chip. My wife can't tell where I am."
My control is eroded significantly with an implant. Unless there is a way to shield the device from being scanned (such as lead plating), I cannot separate it from me, yet my arms and my lungs are mine and are affected by my will while there. I'm a relatively open guy who'll spill major events and information about my life to someone I met less than an hour ago, but I still retain the authority to my mind and my mouth.
I'm torn here because I've had many conversations and daydreams about, ironically enough, more precise computer control over my body in the form of implants and software. It's been a fantasy of mine for some time to be able to accurately self-diagnose my own physiological happenings. I mean, imagine how sweet it would be to know exactly what your blood alcohol level (or blood sugar level or any chemical level) at that moment in time...never mind being able to record previous measurements and save them for later consultation.
Neat stuff, but this kind of technology is not under discussion in the article. All these chips are alleged to do is sit there with a few hundred bytes of data, waiting to be scanned. While being identified or recognized without your explicit control can be extremely dangerous in some situations (domestic violence, spying), most of us don't go to great lengths to obscure our identity while in public. How many people wear long coats, wigs, makeup, and sunglasses to prevent someone from visually IDing them? The eye is a device for facial recognition, for reading the visual data our faces contain and despite the general downward plummet of contemporary behavioral standards, I can't remember a serious call to visually impair people to keep our identities private.
Hmm, probably should keep that idea to myself...
VeriChip – the US company that made the devices and claims to have the only chips that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration – said the implants were designed primarily for medical purposes.So far around 70 people in the US have had the implants, the company said.
© Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2006
Given the context of today, I wonder if the actual individual good that would arise be worth the likely eventual bad.
I know that I'd have a problem with my boss asking that I have this done.
The AP via News8Austin: Judge says groups can buy water rights for preservation
An Austin judge ruled environmental groups seeking to purchase water rights for conservation purposes deserve the same consideration as cities and businesses buying water for consumption.Environmental groups filed suit in 2003 claiming the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality had not fairly considered applications for water rights for environmental purposes.
Copyright ©2006TWEAN News Channel of Austin, L.P. d.b.a. News 8 Austin
But consider this:
If you plan to use water from rivers, streams, underflow, creeks, tides, lakes or bay areas, it is considered state water and you might be subject to the TCEQ water right permitting process.
The question of what to do here, today is complicated. You could take the Misean route and declare this ruling the creation of a loophole in the regulatory framework, thereby constituting an increase in the degree of freedom permitted by the state. I lean towards this view. However, it would be myopic to ignore the inevitable incentives that are created, warped, and repressed by the current scheme that arise as a result of this fraudulent state ownership.
News8Austin: Tarrytown residents oppose development
Tarrytown is popular for its proximity to downtown and its historic charm, but developers are buying mid-century or older properties to tear down and build larger ones."You have outsiders coming in with no regard to people who live here and they're just taking away what's there and building these giant monstrosities that really detract from the neighborhood," resident Haidar Khazen said.
[...]
"When you take a house that just disrespects the land and a builder just throws up a huge 4,500 square foot house on a 50-foot lot, it's just disrespectful," resident Ed Dato said.
Neighbors want city leaders to create clearer zoning policies for large developments going up in neighborhoods.
"The zoning restrictions gave us a real sense of security. But like laws, these zoning restrictions are only effective to the extent they're enforced," resident Bob Farley said.
Austin city leaders say improving code enforcement is a top priority for council members this coming year.
Copyright ©2006TWEAN News Channel of Austin, L.P. d.b.a. News 8 Austin
Currently, a poll on the News8Austin website shows 62% of respondents saying yes and 29% of respondents saying no to the question, "Should the city of Austin create zoning restrictions to prevent large homes being built on smaller urban lots?"
I left the following comment:
Using the city government to scare and bludgeon neighbors into doing what you want. Ultimately threatening homeowners and builders with police violence. That's what "preserve your neighborhood" amounts to in this case. It's sickening things have gotten this bad and even moreso that we end up squabbling over the details of who gets screwed next.
-Charles Hueter
I have little love for the United States Postal Service. It is irritating when they raise First Class stamp prices by a few pennies every other year. They are complicit in the spamming of my mailing address. More fundamentally, they are a postal monopoly held in place through the threat of government force and there are several possible reasons why the USPS monopoly continues today. Then there are the little things, like going to jail for using plastic USPS bins for anything other than mail and not mentioning anything about Lysander Spooner and how he and his American Letter Mail Company competed with the USPS only to be forced out of business by the feds.
But for the moment, I offer praise.
I entered the Balcones Post Office at 11900 Jollyville Road yesterday at lunchtime. With me were two small CD mailers I wanted sent to Canada. As I expected, the place was packed and the lines were long. My waiting number was 83 and the clerks had just called #55. I leisurely began filling out address information, presuming I'd be there for at least half an hour. Every other time I'd been to a Post Office during lunch hours, more of my time would be spent standing in line instead of eating.
So my surprise was pleasant when I noticed the pace of the front desk. In the time it took for me to fill out one mailer, they had warped to the mid-60s. I found waiting number 74 left on a counter and realized if I used it I'd waste the clerk's time at the desk because I wouldn't be done with the second mailer's addresses. I let that opportunity pass. I was barely finished when my number was called. I had been there hardly 10 minutes. Granted, somewhere between seven and ten numbers were passed up when no customers responded. That had a big role to play.
On the other hand, all of the desk clerk stations were manned and I didn't see any of the employees screwing around, chatting with each other right in front of the lines of people like I've seen everywhere else. It was refreshing to see a Post Office work like that.
After I told the clerk I wanted the two items sent to Canada, she grabbed two forms and told me to complete them and return when finished. These customs forms threatening me with nastiness if I lied or did anything unapproved. Reminded of where I was and with whom I was dealing, I still appreciated the much faster than expected service.
But the USPS should still be abolished.
After reading this from Matthew Bryan and remembering that I hadn't checked my Sitemeter details log in some time, I gave it a shot.
The Treasury Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture (TEOAF) administers the Treasury Forfeiture Fund (TFF). The TFF was established in 1992 as the successor to what was then the Customs Forfeiture Fund. It is the receipt account for the deposit of non-tax forfeitures made by the following member agencies:
- Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Division (IRS-CI), U.S. Department of the Treasury;
- U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (U.S. ICE), Department of Homeland Security;
- U.S. Customs and Border Protection (U.S. CBP);
- Department of Homeland Security;
- U.S. Secret Service, Department of Homeland Security;
- U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security
The creation of the TFF brought together all then-Treasury law enforcement agencies. Although some bureaus were subsequently transferred to the Department of Homeland Security by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law No. 107-296), they remain participants of the Treasury Forfeiture Fund.Effective law enforcement actions against criminal enterprises, from drug cartels to terrorist organizations, require depriving them of their enabling assets and profits that support or stem from their existence. The TFF is derived from the forfeited assets of criminal enterprises. The TFF is a “special receipt account”, i.e., a resource account that provides funding to the participating law enforcement agencies to enhance their capabilities to conduct successful investigations and forfeitures.
The Mission of The Treasury Forfeiture Fund is to Affirmatively Influence the Consistent and Strategic use of Asset Forfeiture by Participating Agencies to Disrupt and Dismantle Criminal Enterprises.
The Treasury Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture (TEOAF), through the provision of leadership, guidance, and stewardship, works to maximize the impact of forfeitures performed by the participating agencies.
As the administrator of the Treasury Forfeiture Fund, TEOAF performs the following functions:
- promotes the use of proceeds from asset forfeitures to fund programs and activities aimed at disruption and dismantling criminal infrastructures, in particular major case initiatives and activities enhancing forfeiture capabilities;
- manages TFF revenues to cover the costs of seizure and forfeiture;
- trains law enforcement personnel of the participating agencies in various aspects of asset forfeiture;
- promotes cooperation among federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies through funding of expenses including equitable sharing, as well as the development of task forces;
- promotes financial stability and vitality of the TFF;
- coordinates TFF policy among the participating agencies;
- through the precepts of risk management, identifies and initiates action to address program risks.
The TFF’s enabling legislation was first published in Public law 102-393, enacted October 6, 1992, 106 Stat. 1729, and is codified under Title 31 U.S.C. § 9703.
There are two types of forfeiture available to the government: civil forfeiture and criminal forfeiture. A civil forfeiture is intended to confiscate property used or acquired in violation of the law; a criminal forfeiture is imposed on a wrongdoer as part of his/her punishment following a conviction. The procedures involved in these two types of forfeiture are very different; however, the results are the same, which is the transfer of rights, title, and interest of the property to the United States.
Anyway, learning about the TEOAF was a good exercise. Now I know of a good agency to reference when talking about the entrenched, methodical, and routine federal theft of private property.
Now I know what it's like to be quoted in newsprint.
The Daily Texan: Cooperatively owned bar may open in Austin
Austin may soon have the first and only cooperative-run bar in the United States, said Steven Yarak, founder of the Black Star Pub.Yarak came up with the idea in 2005, when he was surprised to find that in the United States, there wasn't a single community owned-and-run bar. The concept of a co-op bar is that the regulars would be the ones who owned and ran the bar in addition to making decisions that influenced all customers.
Therese Adams, a member of the co-op group, said she believes that a co-op bar promotes the idea that Austin is about a small-town atmosphere.
As is the case with most start-ups, there are many issues that members of the bar are debating, including location.
Yarak said he is certain that if they could "find the right location," they "could make it work."
So far, East Austin is where the group wants to build the bar.
Charles Hueter, a former UT student, said he likes that he's helping create a "serious, authentic bar in East Austin in which he can have a say in how things are run."
I was sitting in the kitchen of the house hosting the meeting when the doorbell rang. Since a stranger was there to greet me when I initially walked in, I figured I'd do the same for whomever this was. Turns out it was Mr. Bagrodia, a student reporter from The Daily Texan. I lead him to the kitchen were some folks were painting pint glasses and working on web design. After exchanging names, I took him outside and found Mr. Yarak. That's when I learned The Press was among us. No pain, though; Adarsh was cool throughout.
Combined with the article on the BSP from last week, this should provide a good publicity boost.
I began to take an active role in the soon-to-be co-op after last week's Wednesday meeting. Ironically, I volunteered to help navigate the rough waters of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission and the imposing Alcoholic Beverage Code. I will try not to burst into flames while reading it, looking for ways to figure out exactly what the state will let us do.
This is the first time I've ever head of an ad for a blogging service on a billboard. Modern technology advertised through essentially medieval means. Not only that, but on the outskirts of a very tech-oriented town that stands in sharp contrast to the surrounding communities.
These are interesting times. What will it be like when blogging loses it's official new flavor?
I retrieved my mail today and discovered a solicitation from "H.O.W. Services" that advertised tree trimming, removal, thinning, and hauling services.
Get a load of the explanatory paragraph:
H.O.W. SERVICES is an affiliate of the H.O.W. Foundation. We are an asset to the community. Our people provide services of all kinds and through their individual efforts, pay for their unique self-improvement programs. Believing in principles that have made this country great, we do not accept, spend, or want money from the government. Being in the people business, we believe in the strength of the individual; further, we believe that government money, given to the people for nothing, is a drain on the productive taxpayer and that same "free" tax money does nothing for the people receiving it, and it's anything but free. Simply put, the H.O.W. Foundation works because everyone who lives here works. The program is the same for everyone without regard to race, color, age, handicap, or national origin.
I'm not sure I want to contract professional help for my backyard (a project that might involve significant tree manipulation). In this age I'm reluctant to take something like these at face value. The flyer offers a 20% "winter special" and discount and free estimates but doesn't list pricing or anything they do other than trimming, removal, thinning, and hauling services. The only other text deals with addresses and the quote above.
Curious.
The Financial Times: Anti-Muslim cartoons 'will fuel terrorism'
Muslim condemnation of the European media campaign to reprint controversial cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed spread on Thursday, with leaders warning the controversy could play into the hands of extremists.© Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2006
One ideology asserts literal submission by all to the word and will of the ether. One ideology asserts the group ought to be given precedence over individuals. What makes this the most interesting is the sincerity each side has in their belief.
Fireworks like these are rare to watch: the fresh impact of two fundamentally incompatible philosophies who have not collided so sharply and so openly in some time.
This is bullshit from beginning to end.
A Louisiana man claims in a lawsuit that Apple's iPod music player can cause hearing loss in people who use it.
This means that it is not impossible to encounter a situation where the volume is too loud for your tastes. It is also well-known that long-term direct exposure to loud noise can harm your hearing.
The devices can produce sounds of more than 115 decibels, a volume that can damage the hearing of a person exposed to the sound for more than 28 seconds per day, according to the complaint.
According to the League for the Hard of Hearing, here are some representative decibel figures:
The iPod players are "inherently defective in design and are not sufficiently adorned with adequate warnings regarding the likelihood of hearing loss," according to the complaint, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in San Jose, Calif., on behalf of John Kiel Patterson of Louisiana.
But the volume control isn't screwed up. It's working perfectly fine. If people are experiencing hearing injuries after listening to an iPod, it's because they set the music's volume too high and listened too long, not because the iPod is dangerous.
The suit, which Patterson wants certified as a class-action, seeks compensation for unspecified damages and upgrades that will make iPods safer. Patterson's suit said he bought an iPod last year, but does not specify whether he suffered hearing loss from the device.
This isn't compensation, this is extortion. Compensation is an effort to pay someone in order to make up for some negative action on your part in the past. If there is no negative action, there cannot be legitimate compensation. Even from the flawed premise of today's product liability system this lawsuit stinks.
Patterson does not know if the device has damaged his hearing, said his attorney, Steve W. Berman, of Seattle. But that's beside the point of the lawsuit, which takes issue with the potential the iPod has to cause irreparable hearing loss, Berman said.
This stuff makes me a potential being a threat of irreparable hearing loss should either of these people approach me.
"He's bought a product which is not safe to use as currently sold on the market," Berman said. "He's paying for a product that's defective, and the law is pretty clear that if someone sold you a defective product they have a duty to repair it."
An Apple Computer Inc. spokeswoman, Kristin Huguet, declined to comment.
Although the iPod is more popular than other types of portable music players, its ability to cause noise-induced hearing isn't any higher, experts said.© 2006 The Associated Press
What transparently worthless people.
The AP via the Washington Post: Women Sue Wal-Mart Over Contraception
Backed by abortion rights groups, three Massachusetts women sued Wal-Mart on Wednesday, accusing the retail giant of violating a state regulation by failing to stock emergency contraception pills in its pharmacies.The lawsuit, filed in state court, seeks to force the company to carry the morning-after pill in its 44 Wal-Marts and four Sam Club stores in Massachusetts.
© 2006 The Associated Press
Under threat of government force, of course.
George W. Bush. He thinks we're consuming too much oil. I'm not making this up. Promise. They just sent me an email.And look: I know, I know. But the only sane response is to cheer and check the details. Five years too late ... but better late than never. Now, how about that gas tax?
I guess whenever someone mentions "ethanol" as a solution to our energy problems, my eyes roll involuntarily. Coal, nukes, wind and solar. Sure. But the only way to get the private sector to really innovate is to make gasoline more expensive.
I've already used this title but gawddamn it if this Brit keeps banging this fucking drum to use the state to force people to do what he wants. Motor vehicle fuel is expensive enough as it is, taking more than $30 to fill the tank on the VW Golf 40+ mpg turbo diesel I drive. Am I "addicted to oil"? No, I am a consumer of petroleum products because they are widely available, widely compatible with my choice of transportation, and switching to something else would be an expense I have no intention on doing unless I decide - uncoerced - that another way is better for me.
I'm open to new ways to power whatever I use to transport me from place to place. I'm not open to the bloated wealth-burning machine in Washington, D.C. leveling yet another threat at the heads of producers and consumers for the purpose of literally making our lives more expensive so that we act as their puppets for the cause of "energy independence."
