Year: 2018

As reported in “The Banner” (July 7, 2017: page 10A – “Estero considers tree protection ordinance”), most members of the Estero Village Council continue to show a lack of understanding of property rights, and a disdain for their neighbor’s decisions. This time, by preliminary approval of a more restrictive and costly tree ordinance.

Village Councilmember Howard Levitan raised the concern because in one day in April, eight trees were cut down in his neighborhood.  He fails to mention how many trees were cut down in the last 10 years in his neighborhood (very few). In my neighborhood, hurricane Irma took down more trees in one day, than all my neighbors have removed in 5 years.

The neighbors who had to make the difficult decision to remove the trees may have consulted arborists and others. They had to pay the cost of tree removal, and the new landscaping. They should not need to pay the village and convince third party busy bodies before doing what they believe is best for their environment on their own land. Especially in a gated community that already has significant restrictions.

Rights homeowners had before Estero became a village should not be nullified by an over-reaching village council.

Libertarians should stop considering anyone for the LP Presidential Nomination who thinks she/he has a chance to win in 2020.

The Presidential Candidate is a marketing tool to promote the Party, and help down ballot candidates.

The amount of money put into the Presidential Campaign should be considered spending advertising dollars, not as necessary spending to win the Presidential election.

Those that think winning the next election is the goal should run as a D or R or in a non-partisan race.

If the goal is just to get elected being the Libertarian Party candidate is a handicap.

Kanye West is getting grief for saying “When you hear about slavery for 400 years … For 400 years? That sounds like a choice.”

Is it wrong to say that when people find themselves in a bad situation, and do not die trying to get out it – “it is a choice”?

Should I be criticized for making a bad choice if I assess my situation and decide I would be worse off fighting, then submitting to the slaver?

If I am in slavery, and believe it is wrong, should I be criticized for having children that will be enslaved?

Brian Page wrote
https://www.news-press.com/story/opinion/contributors/2018/04/13/funding-lee-county-schools-remains-major-concern/507373002/

My comment:

As Margret Thatcher said “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” Government run schools in the United States are such an old institution, that most people do not even consider it a socialist program. But it is a government welfare program that competes with other bureaucracies for taxpayer money. With the advent and growth of other programs clamoring for money, politicians are not willing to set priorities, but rather calling on the taxpayers to pony up more money. It is not just the new increment for schools that concerns some of us, it is the whole idea that we need government schools to encourage growth in Lee County, and that growth is good. If it takes taxing Lee County residents and visitors more, to accommodate the growth, then lets cutback and maybe the growth will go away. People should be encouraged to create and use non-government schools, and let government schools just be a safety net for the those irresponsible people who cannot afford to pay for their own children’s education.

Trump no longer wants us to be the world’s policeman, just the world’s parents. When someone does something wrong (we are also the world’s judge and jury) then it is up to us to punish them. Not to accomplish anything just to let them know we did not like the behavior, and to let them know there is more of that where that came from. Trump et al think of the bombing as a “time-out”. When a parent gives a child a time-out, there are no repercussions for the parent, so why would anyone expect bombing Syria would have repercussions for the United States.

From

Human Action p. 676; p. 680

Those who think private property rights explain why the government can keep honest and peaceful people out of the country are confusing laws with morality.

Moral governments don’t give and take rights, they help people protect their natural rights. Your private property rights don’t extend beyond your private property.

People use politics to obtain advantages over others without paying for the rights they take from them.