The Cost of Living... on the Ocean

This was going to be a great pic for a home school wildlife curriculum... until people in the background decided to lip wrestle.

When traveling in the US, seven nights in a decent metropolitan hotel easily costs $1,000+.  You get a comfortable room, access to a rarely used ADA compliant pool (one of many costly mandates), use of a tiny gym and a marginal breakfast.  The price covers the cost of the facility, utilities, maintenance, salaries, property taxes and numerous other hidden and revealed taxes -  employment, socialist insecurity, permits, municipal inspection fees, fines (more taxes), various sales taxes, etc.

Compare that to seven nights on a cruise ship.  It’s more than a hotel, it maintains a massive water purification and sewage reclamation system, multiple enormous restaurants, massive diesel-electric propulsion, sophisticated navigation and controls, high end gym and theaters, casino, small shopping mall, fire department, private security, a hospital, barbers, IT department, laundry, tailors, machine shop, cold storage, amusements and other things that rival and sometimes exceed what exists in a city.

How is this possible?

Imaging checking into a ~$1,000 per week hotel and being told “we’re going to move you to a luxury hotel, upgrade your breakfast, provide great lunches, gourmet dinners, take you to a few foreign countries, beautiful beaches, provide medical care if needed, security, big city entertainment and amenities…  How is this possible for the same price!?!

How often do these elevators fail and drop out of the sky?

Clues as to why emerged early during a recent voyage.  The first was the absence of permits to marvel at while riding the numerous 11 story elevators (permits are used by gov. and crony capitalists to mulct businesses).  The second was a reliance on multiple companies for everything and no apparent reliance on any gov service. The third was an absence of American employees (businesses are forced to pay multiple employment/wage taxes when employing Americans, foreigners are considerably cheaper to employ even when paid the same salary).

The cruise line also stopped at a private island!  After an employee informed a number of guests of this, a perplexed female passenger asked “so there is no government oversight?  What about pollution?”  Before panic ensued, I politely explained to the lady that profits motivate the cruise line not to pollute, otherwise pollution would hinder their ability to attract guests.

On an island where anarchy exists and the only visible weapon is a fake cannon?

I didn't see any AK47s. How can this place remain peaceful? (Caleb's facial hair did create some worry that he could be Jack Sparrow).

2,400 acres of no government and tourists did not panic. Note the wheelchair bound gentleman on the left. Despite no regulations forcing accommodations, the free market provided a solution.

Stingrays still exist despite the absence of social custodians to protect them.

I was told by ship’s officers that regulations do exist (and also learned that the US can charge a considerable port tax - so cruising could be even cheaper?!?), but a number of regulations seem to be private and industry enforced (I suspect in a way that's analogous to Underwriter’s Laboratories for electronics).  It appears that it is the reduced or limited gov in international waters that makes life on the sea so inexpensive.

For example, remember that medical care (if needed) is also built into a cruise’s cost. I.e., there is no extra charge for treating a broken limb and the necessary x-rays, cast, etc. Why then does it cost ~$10,000 on land (and with no cruise included)!? Because bureaucrats administer costly regulations that severely limit competition and expropriate from providers. But at sea, medical is provided just as other services; in the most sensible and efficient way possible with little or no bureaucratic interference. And since cruise lines are motivated by profits, the quality is excellent because offering credible medical care is necessary to attract customers (and the companies that don't, don't last long).

So it strongly appears that unlimited gov makes life very expensive on land.  Are you getting our money’s worth?

Trinity: No!  Liberty: Hehehe  Keena: I have to leave for my spa appointment... my monogrammed robe should be ready.

There were numerous shows and comedians in two different theaters ...just amazing.  This pic is from where the theater audio is controlled.

No building codes, permitting regime or inspectors on this island?  Is this porch safe?

Keena: I can't decide between the escargot or frog leg appetizer...  Trins: This isn't like one of those land restaurants, have both, there is no extra charge! Caleb: Howdy.

After returning to the US, an elevator certificate confirmed that we were back in the “land of the free.” Just as with many other things that we think gov must "permit," if heavily used passengers elevators that scale more floors can be maintained safely (and while at sea!) without the costly oversight of public custodians, why can’t it be done on land?

Bonus pics from the cutting room floor:

An example of a hermit crab (and to the single ladies that frequent this blog, please note the well groomed facial hair and nicely trimmed finger nails).

The thirsty lady on the left was just informed that she can't have any water because there are no more cups.

Which Makes Us Safe, Laws Or Freedom?

Many advocate that laws can make us "safe" by restricting firearms.  See exhibit 1 below. This may appear to work, but unfortunately innocent smiles don’t dissuade miscreants from forcing their will upon someone weaker. Socialists and communists (aka "progressives") advocate for disarming society despite history demonstrating that it only encourages tyranny.

But when freedoms bestowed by God are respected, multiple options for protection manifest themselves.  Exhibit 2 below illustrates a common option.  Note that it does not matter how big or strong, nor if there is one or many attackers,

because a 55 grain metallic projectile emitted at 2,800+ feet per second quickly encourages bad people to reconsider harming others:

Firearms are arguably the best tools for defending life, and they most commonly do so by only being revealed by the one threatened (as John R. Lott has documented, firearms are regularly used by private citizens to preserve life, not to take it).

Ironically, the organization which many think exists to keep us safe has actually interfered with our ability to do so.  Current infringements upon our freedom to bear arms began in 1934 (NFA under FDR).  Until then, fully automatic firearms could be purchased without any restrictions (and frequently without a sales tax) at places like hardware stores.

The public school narrative claims that “gangsters” necessitated firearm restrictions.  But we are not told that after the end of prohibition in December of 1933 (which was an abysmal failure and another great example of the perils of restricting freedom), the Bureau of Prohibition essentially lost the justification for its existence, so in 1934, instead of being dissolved, it was given purview over the NFA and it eventually became the A TF.  Additional freedoms were infringed upon in 1968 (Gun Control Act under Johnson) and 1986 (FOPA under Reagan, aka the "Firearm Owners Protection Act" - funny how a legislation's title frequently belies what it really does).

But despite attempts to infringe upon what God has bestowed, what freedom remains has continued to improve our lives thru innovation. This is true in all areas of life. In the automotive industry, three wheeled vehicles provide options not available on four wheeled vehicles because of mandates. It’s also true with firearms.

The 1934 NFA unconstitutionally restricted the barrel and overall length of rifles in addition to who could possess one that was fully automatic (one had to pay $200 [a considerable sum in 1934] to not have their right to full auto infringed).  In 1986, Ronald Reagan, much lauded for supposedly defending freedom, imposed further restrictions severely limiting the availability of full auto firearms with FOPA (the "Gipper" speaks out of both sides of his mouth here).

But freedom thankfully finds ways to prevail. An arm brace instead of a butt stock allows the firearm below to meet the classification of a pistol, so barrel and overall length requirements do not apply.  In addition, the folding mechanism makes the firearm easier to carry and the incorporation of tuned triggers can somewhat approximate the behavior of full auto:

In places where fewer infringements on firearms exist, violence is uncommon compared to places like Chicago, Baltimore and others where contempt for freedom is prevalent. So if you really want safety, advocate for the restoration of freedom.

Backyard Tsunami

Something we never considered before, above ground pools can catastrophically fail:

The side burst at a seam while the cover was on. We were days away from removing it and cleaning the pool for summer.

The sand filter weighs about ~200 lbs but the escaping pool water moved it ~50 feet.

Eight to 10 yards of fill dirt joined the pool water during its escape along with 1,000s of tadpoles that went along for the ride.

It created a new entrance for the dog and little kids to come and go as they please. Considering the damage, being on the wrong side of the pool when it burst would have been dangerous.  Sammy: "I think the pool went this way."

The heater didn't move far because the tractor stopped it, but the gas line snapped.

Now on to something completely unrelated... our visit to Crystal Bridges in Bentonville, AR.

Unfortunately, we don't have many pictures, so this post ends here.  What was most impressive was the power of free enterprise.  The architecture, grounds and art collection were spectacular, and none of the funds used to fund the buildings or gallery were coerced or expropriated from anyone.

Lessons from Vegas and the importance of a good brake.

We recently spent time in Vegas visiting family and made some uncommon observations.

One's initial guess before visiting is that it will be seedy.  We've all heard of the crime and corruption gambling engenders, supposedly that's why you can't gamble in most places, and that's why only wise social custodians can run a lottery (plus no one other than the state would spend the extra money on noble causes like education).

Keena: "Whaaaat are we doing in Vegas?  Aren't we homeschooled Christians?"

"...people aren't just weird, they're really weird."

Liberty: "That baby is gonna give me nightmares."  Sam: "That baby's gonna grow into a giant."

Surprisingly, Vegas isn't a dangerous cesspool of violence, crime and debauchery. Sure, you may occasionally see someone who might need additional clothing or less alcohol, but I'll get to that before the end of this post.

It's actually very nice. It does have sections that are less desirable, but it's nice sections are incredibly nice, nicer than those in many cities and it also offers numerous activities for a family.

So why is this? One might think it's because the local gubmit has a "tight reign" on the city, but the reality is that it feeds off of what the city offers and bureaucrats just go along for the ride, they do nothing to make Vegas nicer or better.

Vegas is successful because of free market forces. You'll never find it as a case study in a public school text book because how it has come about militates against the conventional arguments for why gubmit intervention in everyday affairs is necessary.

The reality is that having more freedom encourages competition and spawns self regulation. Casinos want an endless flow of tourists so they are incentivized to offer excellent and unobtrusive security (significantly better than what the gubmit provides), excellent accommodations, tremendous facilities and shows, diverse activities and a safe and very enjoyable experience.  Regulators can't engender anything like this (visit Cuba if you don't believe me), it's the freedom to make choices, voluntarily entering into agreements and the dollars that people choose to spend that does. And continual improvement is motivated the competition component of a free economy (in the case of Vegas it is "freeer" than other places but not totally free).

Beautiful even on an overcast day.

An indoor sky ...and river?  And we're not on the ground floor of this place?

While there, the homeschoolers got a lesson on gambling from their great uncle. He explained some of the games and how to calculate the odds to reveal how gambling is not a wise use of one's money. Ironically though, for those who play state lotteries we learned that they are better off spending their dollars in Vegas. Why? Because casinos will pay out as much as 95% of the money they take in (they actually make more money from shows and accommodations). State lotteries only pay out about 40% and keep the rest (and they still can't lower the cost of education). We concluded that the reason running a lottery is illegal was because the state didn't want others to treat people as poorly as they do.

It's amazing what people can voluntarily create and offer while seeking to enrich themselves without the "help" of wise social custodians coercing people to do things by decree or with the threat of violence.

What about the "sin city" aspect?  As a family we discussed this. It is true that one might see what is considered indecent in Vegas and one can avoid those places, But in the "Bible Belt," immoral behavior is not as obvious but can frequently be seen in the form of deceitfulness or worse. Also ironically, those in the "Bible Belt" who purport to be set free from the bondage of sin in Christ think it is appropriate to bind others thru laws and expropriation (aka local "taxes") to fund their own interests.

Now onto to only unique feature of this blog, transitioning to something that's totally unrelated: A good brake.

Most seem to prefer flash hiders on their muzzles and I have never heard those who own rifles emphasize the need for a good brake.  Here are examples of common hiders:

The typical complaint with a brake is that it increases the decibels heard by the shooter and those standing to the side.  That's true, but in order take quick follow up shots and control as much as possible where the subsequent rounds go, one needs a brake.

A brake is cut so that it resists a portion of the gases that exit the muzzle and acts to pull a rifle forward.  This particular brake also offers some hider functionality at the tip.

The clip below illustrates the value of a brake. The first rifle has a brake; focus on the Eotech optic and notice how little it moves backwards with each round.  The second has a hider/compensator, notice how much the Eotech optic moves backward with each round:

Those who noticed the Barking Spider compensator on the second rifle will likely point out that the manufacturer does offer a brake adapter for it.  Yes, I know... I just have to buy one.  It will be interesting to see if it offers braking performance without the typical brake side effects.  I'll provide feedback in a future post.

Fake News and Gingerbread Bunkers

It is comical to hear about the supposed concern over fake news.  I read that there is a proposal to spend millions so that some extraordinarily wise public custodians can discern what news is fake and block our access to it (this probably sounds familiar to people from former communist countries and China).

So in the interest of combating fake news, and considering it's December 7th, I will make a small contribution to this effort by briefly discussing FDR and Pearl Harbor.

FDR: Purported to be a great president but was really an enemy of the Constitution and freedom.

FDR considered Joseph Stalin, one of history's most brutal dictators, an ally, and fondly called him "Uncle Joe."

An accurate understanding of history is necessary because so much of what is promulgated today is justified by what has previously supposedly transpired.  A great example are economic policies like "cash for clunkers" or farming subsidies that are justified by distorting the real effects of similar policies during the Great Depression of the 1930s.

Pearl Harbor, like the "Civil War," is another huge propaganda ladened topic I was force fed while in public school.  Years ago I met an 88 year old man who left the Navy in 1944 after leaning of some of what follows.  His story caused me to investigate what was left out of my history books:

1. FDR wanted to involve the US in WWII despite claiming the contrary.  FDR goaded Japan into attacking Pearl Harbor (via oil and steel embargoes, freezing financial assets, aiding the Chinese and even sailing destroyers between the Japanese isles) so that what we now know materialized into a horrific tragedy would cause Americans to support military involvement in foreign countries.

2. FDR's administration knew of Japan's plans to attack Pearl Harbor, it had access to decrypted intercepts of Japanese diplomatic and military radio communications.

3. FDR was so strongly convinced of the impending attack that instead of preparing to stop the Japanese fleet, he arranged to have only WWI ships docked at Pearl Harbor to limit the losses to vintage ships.  A "vacate sea" order was also issued to clear Japan's path on its way to Hawaii.  (What an amazing disregard for the lives of others, and for the sorrow so many families would have to endure.)

Much more can be read about how FDR facilitated the attack here.

Now on to revisit an old custom of this blog to move on to a totally unrelated topic: Gingerbread Bunkers.

One of my girls recently employed a concept that never crossed my mind when I built gingerbread houses as a kid.  During a recent Christmas social with friends to build houses, instead of doing the conventional "make it look like a house as much as possible," she... essentially built a bunker and stuffed it with candy:

Squeeks and the gingerbread bunker with Otto the dog providing over-watch; ready to alert her to threats to the treasure inside.

A brilliant idea, especially if one desired to smuggle a bunch of candy out of such an event.

Be Thankful For Our... Comforts?

I recently decided that if I hear another Christian claim we have so many freedoms in this country I'm going to have to address this in a post.  It just happened last night.

So here it is: Unfortunately Christians confuse "comfort" with "freedom."

Maintaining vehicles, organized sports for the kids, innumerable shopping options, decorating our houses, indulging in favorite foods, 500 TV channels to choose from, access to our favorite over-priced coffee, going to the game, etc. has nothing to do with "freedom." These are all "comforts" we experience as long as we regularly surrender our wealth in the form of "taxes" or fines to avoid being subject to violence and being placed in cages by people in official looking costumes.

I suspect this sounds foreign to many.  Ask Mariza Reulas of what I'm referring to or a myriad of others who have tried to avoid the following forms of expropriation (or violations of our rights) and are now suffering for it:

Purchase of a permit, license or tax when fishing or hunting, operating as a beautician, operating a trash service or nursery, conducting business as a realtor, day care provider, electrician, taxi or dog groomer, maintaining an elevator, selling eggs or milk to the public, making jam in your kitchen and selling it, building a house, paying a cellular, water, electricity, trash or any bill, etc., etc., etc.

Securing a permit for a garage sale or your kid's lemonade stand, purchasing gubmit mandated health care, paying the exorbitant "fees" for developing a medicinal product or brewing and selling beer.

Collecting the mandated tribute from customers you sell to (aka "sales taxes") or disclosing on a form how much you've paid them.

Paying the gubmit thousands of dollars every time you purchase a new or used car or pay for the annual stickers and "registrations."

Paying real estate "taxes" (note that no one owns their home, they rent it from local bureaucrats) which fund the indoctrination of children in the precepts of statism, socialism, amoral and abnormal sexual behaviors, Islam and also promulgates acceptance of the aforementioned examples of theft.

Or, simply do one of the following:

Assert the fourth amendment at the airport.

Don't wear a seat belt or exceed posted speed limits, or remove components of your emission system so you pollute less by burning less fuel.

Drive a car without the required papers and mandated insurance. (Imagine what our founders would have thought of being forced to maintain "papers" in order to leave your home and run errands).

I am not suggesting that anyone do these things, I'm simply offering clarification - .yearly paying tens of thousands in protection money to keep yourself out of a cage in order to fund things that are antithetical to a healthy society, or so politicians can buy votes with social programs, or for bureaucrats to expand their power in exchange for enjoying experiences or pursuits that are basic to human existence is... slavery.

Distortions In Dairy

What follows are excerpts written by Calvin for an upcoming debate tournament.  It explains how to rectify dysfunction in the dairy industry.  I'm posting it because the solution he offers applies to all dysfunctional markets:

Got milk? Well the US certainly does. To be more specific, the US has a dairy glut right now. According to Vox news source “The United States is currently in the midst of an epic cheese glut — with 1.2 billion pounds of cheese sitting in cold storage.” It goes on to say that “America’s dairy farms are expected to produce a record 212 billion pounds of milk this year — and there aren’t nearly enough customers to buy it all.” Why so much dairy? Well according to the article the US used to have a big overseas customers, mainly being China and Europe. But as of late China's economy has taken a dive, the EU has started producing more dairy, and Russia has slapped trade sanctions on foreign cheese. Yet even though the dairy market has lost some substantial customers, why according to the USDA's statistics does the US keep producing more milk that it ever has been before? Why hasn't the market yet solved for this overproduction problem? The answer can be fond in the fact that dairy producers are so heavily subsidized. The American Action Forum reported in an article regarding the 2014 farm bill that “The dairy market is so tightly controlled that it is completely unresponsive to consumer demand.” So I invite you judge, to please join me and my partner as we affirm that the United States government should substantially reform its agricultural and/or food safety policy by reforming it's broken dairy support program.

FACT 1. The Dairy Producer Margin Protection Program (DPMPP) is a subsidies program (editor's note: "subsidy" is a euphemism for redistributed wealth). AMERICAN ACTION FORUM, Feb. 2014: The DPMPP pays dairy farmers when the national margin on milk sales falls to below a set threshold. Margin insurance is highly subsidized—the premiums are fixed—and ripe for abuse from farmers seeking the maximum payout.

FACT 2. The Dairy Product Donation Program does not rectify the problems created by FACT 1. AMERICAN ACTION FORUM, Feb. 2014: The 2014 farm bill also directs the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a Dairy Product Donation Program.  The Secretary is authorized to purchase excess dairy products at market prices for distribution to low income groups. The supply management program was intended to be a counterbalance to the new margin insurance program, which could encourage overproduction and drive down prices.

So exactly what problems does a dairy policy create?

1. Burden of cost from overproduction is placed on taxpayers, not farmers. AMERICAN ACTION FORUM, Feb. 2014:  Current federal dairy programs are the antithesis of free market. Despite the massive overhaul this farm bill proposes, pricing will continue to be set by the federal government rather than the market. The new margin insurance program proposes to shift more risk to farmers, but the heavy subsidies and fixed premiums keep the burden on taxpayers. The dairy product donation program is flawed as well. While donations to low income groups are laudable, buying up excess supply in order to further manipulate the dairy market is absurd. The dairy market is so tightly controlled that it is completely unresponsive to consumer demand. Daren Bakst Research Fellow in Agricultural Policy Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic PolicyStudies, Sep 2016: Ultimately, both programs influence the prices consumers pay for both milk and milk-based products, impact the costs of other federal safety net programs, and make taxpayers subsidize dairy producers instead of requiring them to improve the efficiency of their operations or otherwise manage their operating risks.

2. Dairy policy encourages massive waste. FOX NEWS, Oct. 2016: America’s dairy farmers are crying over spilled milk — the 43 million gallons of it they have dumped in fields and elsewhere over the first eight months of the year as the US deals with a massive milk glut. It’s the most discarded milk in at least 16 years.

3. Dairy policy causes the milk market to be unresponsive to consumers. John Stossel, host of Stossel, on FOX Business Network, Sep. 2013: The price of milk is decided by regulators, using complicated formulas. They set one price for wholesale milk used to produce "fluid" products and another for milk used in making cheese. It's a ridiculous game of catch-up, in which the regulated prices never change as fast and efficiently as they would in a market.

How do we solve this problem? 

1. Congress votes to cancel the Dairy Producer Margin Protection Program and Dairy production donation program and any other subsidized dairy insurance programs.
2. Funding is a net reduction in federal spending because programs are eliminated.

How will these actions manifest themselves?

1. The free market (demands of consumers) will create efficiency by reallocating the work of producers to where they are needed most. VOX, Oct. 2016: If there’s a glut of milk out there, that means there are too many dairy farmers. The most economically efficient option is to let the excess dairy farmers go out of business and find other consumer needs to meet (e.g., poultry, beef, etc.), rather than pay them to keep milking their cows, exacerbating the glut. (see also reason.com / Baylen J. Linnekin). CNN, reporting on the USDA's use of taxpayer funds to buy up some of what it referred to as our "massive cheese stockpile," attributed the cause of our oversupply of cheese to "increased milk inventories, higher European exports, low prices, sluggish demand and shifting consumption habits." In any normal industry, certainly any one in which the free market is given even lip service, these factors would signal producers about the need to change:

2. Responses to market demand lead to better practices. AGRILAND, Jan. 2016: “After the dropping of New Zealand’s agricultural subsidies “Herds were consolidated, and breeds that reflected market demand—producing leaner milk, for instance—rose to prominence. And benefits to the land were dramatic. Pesticide use declined by 50%. Soil erosion, land clearing, and overstocking also declined. The entire agricultural sector was forced to shift toward better practices that increased efficiency and yield.” In the words of law school professor and food lawyer Baylen J Linnekin, “who can get us out of this mess? Expecting those same farm lobbies, Congress, and USDA bureaucrats to break the wheel is a fool's errand.” We can't rely on government intervention to change this curdled catastrophe.

It is time to debunk this myth that subsidies are required. "The distortions caused by federal farm policies have long been recognized. In 1932 a member of Congress noted that the Agriculture Department spent "hundreds of millions a year to stimulate the production of farm products by every method, from irrigating waste lands to loaning and even giving money to the farmers, and simultaneously advising them that there is no adequate market for their crops, and that they should restrict production." That sort of folly is similar eight decades later, except that subsidies have increased from "hundreds of millions" to tens of billions of dollars. The Federated Farmers of New Zealand argues that New Zealand's experience "thoroughly debunked the myth that the farming sector cannot prosper without government subsidies." That myth needs to be debunked in the United States as well.”

What Happened?

I know we have some 'splaining to do, some have wondered why we departed from the farm after three years.

It started in late August of '15. Within three months the Lord provided me with an IT opportunity, we sold our animals and associated equipment, relocated the family and moved all of our belongings.  We also found a great church and started making new friends.  We suddenly went back to suburban life for a number of reasons:

1. We could not generate sufficient income fast enough.  Because the effort started with endeavors that no one involved had previously proven to be successful, by the time one was found we were already 2+ years into the effort (the pig endeavor had the potential to generate sufficient income, there were ~150 and counting by the time we left).

There were also two "macro" reasons that affected income generation in our new environment that I had never been exposed to before:

A. The local economy was dysfunctional.  Approximately half of the people in our area were on some type of welfare, so half of the people had essentially withdrawn themselves from contributing in any meaningful way to the economy and served as a drain on those who were productive.  It bred a type of "hand out" / entitlement mentality and strange ideas on how a economy supposedly functions.  It wasn't uncommon for people to ask for an additional discount on something that was already reasonably priced; as if prices should be set based on people's means and not on the cost of production.  For example, in order to expedite our move I listed things inexpensively.  I asked $85 for three used electric fence reels with poly wire that retailed for $275.  The first day I received five calls and all wanted me to drop the price further.  Since I had enough of this behavior I increased the price at $125 and sold them in two days.

Much more could be written about the difference in rationale in areas where people are industrious and areas where they are not.  While previously working in IT and in a suburban area I never perceived how the structure of a local economy can change the way people think and behave.  For example, in areas where people are dependent, they support and clamor for gubmit to force the appropriation of other people's wealth to meet their needs (and thanks to public schools they've been conditioned to believe that's somehow "fair" or it's necessary to "level the playing field").  I've wondered how much different they are from Bolsheviks.  For some reason they can't make an association between the failure of grand redistribution schemes (like East Germany, Communist Russia and currently Venezuela) and the economical malaise they live in.

Hard to change topics before mentioning at least a few more goofy ideas (especially since I'm talking about the belt buckle of the "Bible belt!!!").  Occasionally you'd hear of the need for a business to "give back to the community," as if there was something inherently negative about them and they needed to make amends for it. Hearing this was like the sound of fingernails on a chalk board (or at least like that feeling after realizing you just used a permanent marker on a dry erase board).  Most locals couldn't comprehend that businesses ALREADY gave and give back EVERY DAY simply by providing products and services people want. Another favorite really flawed perspective was hearing farmers complain about those living off of the rest of us by collecting "welfare" and then lamenting that the farm bill needed to get passed - which is nothing more than welfare for farmers!

B. Too much regulation / Dept of Agriculture interference and unnecessary costs.  (At least too much for me, there are some who were still able to do well in the environment we left and I admire their perseverance.) For example, with pigs, did you know that feeding them table scraps could destroy all of the agriculture in the US? (If that sounds like crazy talk, good; your ability to reason is not impaired).  This piece of fear mongering came from a director at the Dept of Agriculture.  I've learned that this type of interference and central planning in the "home of the free and land of the brave" exists in most areas of our economy today, from selling eggs (see HERE) all the way to mundane things like buying insurance or natural gas.  I think most of us don't realize to what extent central planning exists because most of us have been employees all of our lives.  The missed opportunities and keen awareness of the costs of regulation or the fines, fees, licenses, permits and other excuses made for expropriation seem to only be appreciated by the self employed or employers.

The challenge with pigs was to reduce feed costs.  Near the farm there were institutions that were filling landfills with literally tons of food each day.  One was a college that we approached about collecting the left-overs from student's plates.  I was told it was "illegal." I was incredulous and thought surely, this person was misinformed.  To my dismay I discovered that it was true - feeding pigs table scraps and then selling those pigs really was illegal.  I was told by a wise central planner (most likely a political appointee who admitted they had no experience in raising pigs or other animals as a business) that the practice of raising pigs on table scraps, which has been done since time immemorial, was dangerous because it could sicken my pigs and spread an illness to the entire country and destroy the US pork industry (I'm not making this up.  We can probably thank the public school system for this person's education).  To that I politely explained that we've got a big problem - her health inspectors were allowing restaurants all over the state to serve food unfit for pigs.  My epiphany was completely ignored of course.  I have not done the research but I strongly suspect the impetus of the regulation was the big meat producers (i.e., crony capitalism, they line the pockets of politicians and regulators who then create regulations that favor the pocket liners). Regulations like this protect the market share of large producers by severely hindering the ability of small producers to exist and eliminate choices for consumers (we also saw a small local competitor crash and burn after state and local public "custodians" fee'd and regulated them out of existence).

And there are also a few "micro" reasons:

2. I trusted the natives.  I was so naive that I didn't realize I was among natives.  They looked just like me (except for those in the pic).  And from stories I've heard from missionaries, my experience was not unlike being in a 3rd world country.  What I did not realize was that in an environment where the economy is impaired, others will see you as a threat and they'll either take advantage of you or marginalize you.  It was like being back in high school.  They're cordial and gracious in your presence, but ruthless behind your back as they "bend the ear" of others.  It wasn't until six months into the endeavor that another successful farmer from whom I started gaining insight from noted that I was working with hillbillies who were trying to eliminate me.  I noticed it in town also.  I had to replace a truck tire and ball joints and the shop tried to overcharge me $300.  Initially I didn't want to believe it because after all we had moved to the "Bible belt."  Another time it was at a land auction, I was told the day before the auction that the owner had settled the debt so it would no longer be available.  The next day I overheard the same person mention that it had sold that morning.  I inquired as to why I was told it would not be available and surmised that since I wasn't a local they didn't want me to participate.  Lesson learned: if you're ever in a new environment work thru someone you can trust until you understand the inter-personal landscape.

Also the native's reliance on "tradition" was a problem.  There is a line in a Twenty One Pilots song that appears to be about the bleak life in a small town called Hometown and says to put away the gods your father serves.  It reminds me of their weird stubbornness, or insistence in doing things a certain way that was based on some perceived tradition.  For example, when we were tapping trees, TJ did the research, consulted with others who had experience, and inexpensively procured the appropriate hardware (items that incorporated efficiency and taps designed based on the latest understanding of what works best for sap collection).  The natives whittled taps out of wood and there was mention of how things used to be done "around here" I guess about 100 years ago.  Besides unnecessarily wasting a lot of time whittling, there was another reason to prefer non-wood taps since wood encouraged the presence of bacteria that would compromise the quality of the syrup.  TJ also used tubes and lids to cover the sap as much as possible.  The natives did not, their collection system was exposed and occasionally would offer surprises like dead squirrels or mice.

"Yes, it's sweet but has an interesting taste - like that of wild game with a hint of acorn."

3. Too much in-efficiency.  And when issues were realized, it was extremely difficult and costly to recover from the effects of poorly designed systems.  A good example was the water system discussed in previous posts that the natives implemented ("mechanized" and extremely time consuming).

So for now, farming is behind us but we do miss its benefits.  Especially, those opportunities to teach the kids how to drive...

Liberty: "ok Sammy, it's going straight now, more gas!"

Sammy: "Whaaat? Back to processed foods!?"  (Thankfully no, there is always someone relatively nearby who will sell you food from their farm.)

And even though we're back in suburbia, there are still farm-like chores like dropping trees (watch for the piece of wood that almost tags Trins the camera girl)...

More Observations From History...

We've fallen behind, since the last post a lot has happened: a new job, sold our animals, found a new place to live in a different state, moved all of our belongings and started settling into a new community.  For now, here are additional observations I've wanted to post on things I found at my grandparent's house...

A steamer chest.  I remember learning about these in elementary school.  I suspect this is one they used to cross the Atlantic (these weren't made for sissies; no built in wheels nor retractable handles for pulling).

My grandfathers desk, appears to be untouched since the early 1960s.  Besides some of his cook books (in French) it has calendars from the 1950s with daily entries about what he did.  It's fascinating, I even found a note he wrote to my dad encouraging him and dissuading him from habits that he associated with "sissies." (The white corded earphones are mine, I put them down to take the pic.  The bowling trophies on top are my dad's from the late '50s and early '60s.)

Upon opening one of his calendar books, I found a ticket dated 2/20/1955.  It appears that he didn't use his turn signal and the "park" popo shook him down for $5 (~$45 in 2015 dollars).

I also found a lot of pictures. In some I can recognize people or objects still in the house, but many I cannot relate to anything.  Some appear to be ancestors that we can't ID with certainty like those above.

A 1958 Mercedes 220S sedan.  It's been in the garage for 40 years.  The tires aren't just flat they're falling apart but the body is in great shape.

The steering wheel looks like it belongs in a bus and the leather ain't too supple anymore.  The dash is mostly wood and it only has lap belts.

Interesting, it says "MADE IN WESTERN GERMANY" under the hood.  The former West and East Germany is a great case study.  The East was the ultimate in "big gubmit" run everything, whereas the West had considerably more freedom and much less intrusive gubmit.  There are many things West Germany produced and exported which improved the lives of people around the world (like this car).  When I was there in 1992, I was surprised at how it either matched and in some cases exceeded standards in the US.  I traveled to the former East Germany and the environment was considerably different, as if it was 40 years behind or simply dysfunctional (e.g. cars were made out of compressed cardboard).  How many things does big gubmit produce?  When considering the former East Germany, beside fear and tyranny, the answer is extremely little compared to a free economy (ever see any US imports from East Germany)?

Cigars that my grandfather used to smoke, they appear to be very inexpensive.  1940s maybe?

Well, not quite when you extrapolate for the effects of inflation and notice the blue tax stamps on every box.  It reminds me of a discussion I had with a distillery employee in the Midwest.  He mentioned how the AT F can do inspections to validate "compliance" and that the distillery has to pay "fees" based on what they produce (not based on revenue) or they will be shut down.  I asked if the AT F provided any help or advice to distillers in return for the money they take.  The answer was they do absolutely nothing.  His sentiment was that they were no different than the mob, they coerce producers to pay "protection" money or face violence or time in a steel cage.  The same thing happens with tobacco, the blue stamps were proof that protection money was paid.

Eventually I found a bottle with evidence that protection money had been paid for it.

Coffee grinder, this design was patented in 1905.

One of Great Grandpa's kitchen tools being put back into use.

A bug sprayer (top) and fire extinguisher.  I remember bug sprayers like this one used in cartoons when growing up.  I never could relate to them.  This was the first time I saw a real example.  The fire extinguisher is from the '30s and requires pumping in order to create pressure.  Below is an ad for it:

 

There are many bottles from what appear to be the 1940s? They are all glass and heavy.  Funny how an electric company also made furniture polish.

Grandma's 1950 Singer sewing machine.  I found a receipt for $150 but it mentions a "trade-in," I'm guessing grandma traded in an earlier model.

This find was priceless.  Ever have the JWs (Jehovah's Witnesses) come to your door?  With a little research it's not hard to dismiss their religion as being a cult (they deny that Jesus is God [Romans 9:5, Col 2:9, Titus 2:13, etc.] and they believe salvation is attained thru works and not faith [Ephesians 2:8-9, Gal 1:8-9] among other heresies).  Something a little harder to pin them down on are their false prophesies, like one that the world was to end in 1975 which they'll simply deny as "a lie."  But just imagine a conversation after finding a copy of Awake! from 1968 (published by the Watchtower, the JW equivalent of the "Death Star," it essentially gives JWs their marching orders).

ME: ...and the other significant issue with the Watchtower are the multiple false prophesies they've made.  The Bible tells us in Duet. 18:20-22 to dismiss anyone who makes a false prophesy.  JW (with a wry smile): Well, the world is full of lies, you can't believe everything that you read.  ME (with my version of their wry smile):  Oh yeah, I totally agree, that's why it's great to have original copies of Death Star prophesies ...oops, I mean Watchtower (as I produce the document above).

And here's another use of the word "negro" by the news media, this time in March of 1968, seven years after we're supposed to believe that Hawaii used "African" on certficates of birth?  Could the Pre sident's certificate be a forgery?  Nah, no way, not in land of the free and home of the brave!

When I was a kid I disliked Reader's Digest because the issues never had enough pictures for my satisfaction, especially when in the sitting room at the doctor's office.  Here's one from 1935, it has no pictures at all.  I would have had a really hard time waiting for the doctor in the 30s.

Part of the reason it's taken a while to produce this post is that I didn't know where to start with this American icon.  As I thought about what my grandparents might have been told about the "great emancipator" to make them want his picture in their home, it made me ponder how common and insidious propaganda is.  Especially for Lincoln, the propaganda campaign has been especially successful.  As a victim of the public school system in the '70s and '80s I can commiserate because I bought all of the lies.  "Lincoln was a wonderful hero for opposing slavery and the South didn't like that so they decided it was worth having a 'civil' war over, the South lost and the world is now a better place" sums up what I was taught.  For some great articles on this subject, see here and here.

The funny thing is that the premier candidate for being the worst President of all time (and responsible for war crimes) is venerated as being one of the best (even by many Christians which is even more baffling). 

One could argue that he is the only one that has ever conformed to the Constitution's definition of treason ("Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them"). 

He imprisoned thousands of northerners for exercising their 1st Amendment right by disagreeing with him and he put them in the same POW camps as the Confederates where people were purposely starved to death (unlike in the Confederacy where POWs staved to death because of food shortages imposed by the North). 

In 1858 he said "I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes nor of qualifying them to hold office nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races, which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality."  (Yes, you really did just read that - the words of Abraham Lincoln.  If you feel scandalized, you're a victim of propaganda.)

And yes, he is the first President to invite prominent blacks to the White House... only to ask them to encourage blacks to the leave the country and return to Africa.

He and his buddies knew that the South's contribution to the federal budget was 75% (yes, production in the south funded most of the fed back then via tariffs). Sure, it could be said that the war was about a number of things; preserving taxes generated through tariffs, empire building, or expanding the power of Republican Party, but not slavery.  Just ask the US Senate, on 7/26/1861 they declared that the purpose was "to preserve the Union." Ulysses S. Grant, the most acclaimed Union General, a slaveholder himself, said "If I thought this war was to abolish slavery, I would resign my commission and offer my sword to the other side."  No wonder the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in the South and not in four northern slave states.

The South felt plundered by tariffs and resentment grew because most of the taxes were spent in the North, that's why southern states began to seceeeeeeed, meaning that they withdrew from the Union and asserted their independence, just like the original 13 colonies did.  And for that they were invaded.

The South didn't try to take over the federal gubmit as is implied in the words "civil war," their intentions and actions were the opposite - for example, SC was trying to purchase Ft. Sumter from the federal gubmit up until the time Lincoln invaded the South, and Lincoln's representatives acted as if they were considering the sale.  SC didn't realize at that time that Lincoln's real intention was to subjugate them by force. 

That's also why other states seceded, they thought it was madness for Lincoln to invade, their exit had nothing to do with "fighting to keep" slavery (Article I, Section 9 of the Confederate Constitution prohibited the importation of slaves - not something people would do if they wanted to perpetuate it).

The martial law he imposed was later declared by the Supreme Court to be unconstitutional (one can understand why after a plain reading of the Constitution), the court declared that martial law "...destroys every guarantee of the Constitution" Ex parte Milligan (71 US 2 [1866]).  

There was enough opposition to the war in the North that congress passed draft laws in 1863 and Lincoln's military killed protesters, most notably in NY (...wait, this gets confusing, why would he unconstitutionally impose servitude into the military upon free men, I thought emancipation was his passion?).  See what I mean, where do you start with this joker?

More importantly, why is there such militant and pervasive propaganda surrounding someone who completely disregarded the Constitution he swore to uphold and defend while unleashing violence, horror and death upon hundreds of thousands?  Easy...  he's the guy who did the most to destroy the Republic, freedom and independence and gave birth to the centralized control that exists today.  Before the invasion of the South, people understood states to be separate countries - that is the obverse of today's understanding.  The gubmit was literally nothing compared to what it is today.  If the gubmit (via the public schools) accurately provided the facts and sentiments surrounding the war it would obviate the very favorable perception of its origin and purpose.