Liberty on the Rocks™ Denver

A Grassroots Freedom Movement

Couldn’t we get a few more levels of government involved?

David K. Williams, Jr. | February 6, 2010

Today’s Denver Post declares in a broad headline

The article by Mike McPhee states that “the announcement of a $304 million federal loan Friday gave the green light to the redevelopment of Union Station… .”
Further, “the loan (is) guaranteed by the City and County of Denver.”
This means that one level of government, the feds, are going to give your money to another level of government, the Regional Transportation District, and that another level of government, the City and County of Denver, has guaranteed with your money the loan of your money to you.
All of this for a project no private investor would touch.
Of course, every transaction between each level of government has a cost. You, of course, pay for that, too.

Hey, let’s put these guys in charge of EVEN MORE healthcare

David K. Williams, Jr. | February 4, 2010

According to today’s edition of the Denver Post:

A Montbello mother says her 9-year-old son’s death from severe asthma could have been prevented had Denver Human Services resolved problems with his Medicaid pharmacy benefits.
Zuton Lucero said she called Human Services every three days for months last year when she was suddenly unable to get prescription drugs for her son, Zumante.
The boy’s health deteriorated without the medication, his doctor said, and he died at Children’s Hospital in July after losing consciousness at his house after an attack.
“I don’t want anyone else to be sitting where I’m sitting,” Lucero said.
Unfortunately, “compassionate” progressives want us ALL to be sitting there, Ms. Lucero.
They want the same government run system that neglected your little boy to take care of all of us.
And somehow those of us that don’t believe the government is the answer to all problems are the “callous” and “uncaring” ones.
See “The human system fell down” in today’s paper.

But I thought the government didn’t have enough money.

David K. Williams, Jr. | January 3, 2010

From the Associated Press:

DENVER (AP) — Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter does not have a staff photographer – but he has billed taxpayers more than $200,000 to hire outside contractors and pay for photographs, videos and TV ads promoting his accomplishments since June 2008, including videos of him receiving a “Father of the Year” award and a press conference naming his friend, Michael Bennet, to a U.S. Senate seat.

Until nonsense like this goes away, statists can save their tears about a lack of government money and the need for more taxes.
The government need for more money is a lie.

Makin’ history

David K. Williams, Jr. | December 21, 2009

Just prior to the Senate passing a version of Obamacare, Democratic Senator Tom Hawkin, from Iowa, said “let’s make history.”

They did.
So did General Custer.

I’ll drink to that

David K. Williams, Jr. | December 21, 2009

A headline from today’s Denver Post reads

That’s like winning a temperance award from Dean Martin.

Dilbert explains RTD and FasTracks

David K. Williams, Jr. | December 19, 2009

Dilbert.com

The backers of this boondoggle said it would cost $4.7 billion. Too many people believed this fraud and said “OK” and approved a tax increase.

Woops. Now RTD says the actual cost will be $7.0 billion. They want voters to approve that, too.

Many will vote for it, thus sanctioning and approving their own robbery.

It starts to get hard to feel sorry for those that willingly submit to fraud. Of course, the bad part is that those voting for RTD want those that have not fallen for the scam to contribute, too.

And, due to the power of democracy, they can make it happen.

Sometimes the answer is all too simple.

David K. Williams, Jr. | December 12, 2009

On Friday, the U. S. House of Representatives approved “sweeping new financial industry regulations.
The bill, among other things,
hands regulators broad new powers likely to impact everyone from the average mortgage applicant to multibillion-dollar financial houses that lord over the global economy.
Among its most applauded — and controversial — components, the 1,279-page bill would create an entirely new regulatory agency, the Financial Services Oversight Council. Its charge would be to protect consumers and give regulators the power to pre-emptively dismantle companies if they conclude those firms threaten the economy.
The premise of such regulation is based on a fanciful idea. Those in favor of regulation such as this believe that government functionaries have some idea how to successfully manage an industry, or at least some portion of it.
This premise has no basis in fact. Even if one believes that Wall Street firms and bankers are evil and must be reigned in, this regulation does not solve the problem.
It merely substitutes the evil bankers with evil, and incompetent, bureaucrats.
More regulation is not the answer. More regulation results in more rules. More rules means more time and money must be spent in complying with those rules. It provides incentives for those that can find loopholes in the rules. It costs money to enforce the rules.
Society eventually ends up spending more time and resources arguing about commas, definitions and exceptions to arbitrary regulations than to actually solving the perceived problem.
The problem can be solved with one rule, and it is already in place:
Do not commit fraud.
All people, even Wall Street Bankers, should be able to engage in any voluntary transaction with any other person as long as no fraud is perpetrated.
This simple rule, however, does not allow politicians to control anything. They do not get to create new agencies. They do not get to hire new regulators. They do not get to pay off political debt. Nor do they solve the problem.
But it is not about solving the problem. It is about control. And the House bill gives Congress plenty of that.

Let’s put these guys in charge of health care.

David K. Williams, Jr. | December 9, 2009

According to an article by the Denver Post’s Michael Riley, “Feds settle suit over mismanagement of Indian trust land,”

the federal government agreed Tuesday to settle for $3.4 billion a lawsuit that claims it badly mismanaged millions of acres in Indian trust land over more than 100 years.
The federal government would return those lands to tribal ownership, reversing a controversial policy of privatization that dates to 1887, was reversed in the 1930s and is seen by many in Indian country as contributing to a legacy of poverty and underdevelopment that continues to this day.
the announcement finalizes a monumental legal struggle that had become a symbol of government neglect and mismanagement, one that a district judge last year called an “irreparable breach of fiduciary duty” by the Department of the Interior.
federal officials appeared to have lost millions of critical records dating back decades that were supposed to record income from trust lands and what was done with the money.
And some statists argue it is a moral imperative that we give these same people control over health care. These statists have a misguided faith in the government. They refuse to see the historical, proven inability of the government to manage a lemonade stand, much less the country’s entire health care system.
There are none so blind as those that refuse to see.

Blind faith in the Cult of the State

David K. Williams, Jr. | November 19, 2009

From today’s Denver Post:

Colorado has received millions in stimulus funding for projects in the 8th, 24th, 45th and 64th congressional districts, according to a federal website tracking the money.
But the state has only seven districts.
It turns out that the misclassifications were the result of mistakes, faulty interpretations and even guesses born of frustration with the stimulus-reporting software …
Yet the members of the Cult of the State continue to worship their Government God as the answer to all of society’s ills, real and perceived.
Perhaps these cult members should reevaluate their fealty to such a feeble deity. Perhaps they should look elsewhere for solutions.
Maybe the cult’s members are right and government’s impending takeover of health care will not suffer from similar incompetence.
However, it takes an unwarranted and unearned faith to believe so.