Posted on 12/06/2006 4:06:46 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
In Maryland, like in many other states, candidates carrying the designation of "libertarian" emerged on the ballot. In Maryland, the libertarian Senate candidate was Kevin Zeese, a former official of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. He wants the government to leave him alone so he can smoke dope. Generally speaking, libertarians are supposed to favor limited government and low taxes. Yet, the libertarian magazine Reason has astonished many observers by publishing an article that seems to be endorsing global taxes and the world government such a scheme would entail.
In an article about the collapse of the global warming treaty, Ronald Bailey argues that "man-made global warming is a global problem" and that the solution has to be global in scope. "One suggestion is a global carbon tax," he says. Bailey served as the 1993 Warren T. Brookes Fellow in Environmental Journalism at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a pro-free market think-tank. He had been considered one of the best and brightest thinkers in this critical area of environmental policy.
After citing an article on the matter, Bailey says, "....a carbon tax is not a goody, but the pain it causes is more easily administered and monitored. First, the tax offers stability; governments, industries and consumers all see what the price of carbon based fuels will be. Second, it can be far more transparently administered across the globe. If a country fails to charge the agreed upon tax, other countries can boost their tariffs on exports from that country as a way to encourage it to join the global climate tax regime. Third, the tax can be adjusted over time to meet agreed upon global goals such as ultimate level to which to [sic] greenhouse gases should be allowed to accumulate in the atmosphere. And fourth, poor countries could be made exempt from the tax until the average incomes of their citizens reach some agreed upon level."
The idea that a global tax could be "easily administered and monitored" makes sense only in the context of creating a world government or using existing international institutions. But it's hard to see how any of this could be "easily administered and monitored." Indeed, such a scheme sanctions governmental control of peoples' lives, under the guise of regulating their use of energy, and threatens the sovereignty of nations.
It is amazing that Reason, a magazine of "free minds and free markets," would publish an article promoting governmental interference, this time at the global level. It represents the kind of stale liberal thinking that is quite popular at the United Nations, where officials are pushing not only a global carbon tax, but an international tax on airline travel, a global currency transactions tax, and other measures designed to bring in trillions of dollars to international bureaucracies.
Reason is published by the Reason Foundation, whose trustees and officers include many successful businessmen and prominent individuals dedicated to promoting the free enterprise system.
Despite his reference in the article to the possibility of a global carbon tax, Bailey tells me in an email that he did not mean the carbon tax to be a "global tax" in the sense that it would be collected by the U.N. or other international agency. He explained, "I would oppose any such global tax. Instead the carbon tax would an internationally harmonized tax that would be collected by national governments and spent by national governments. Perhaps as an offset to income taxes or other taxes, but that's a much longer discussion."
The concept of an "internationally harmonized tax" seems to imply a global governmental mechanism. What's more, his article refers to a "global climate tax regime," international pressure on countries to agree to the tax, and using the proceeds to "meet agreed upon global goals."
If this is not a world government, I don't know what it is.
---------
Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at cliff.kincaid@aim.org
--------------------
Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.
These are the Bill Maher brand of losertarians.
They are known big social liberals, but this is shocking, I thought them to be more political anarchist.
Wait, this could cause anarchy, so maybe this is the regular stuff in another form.
Well, there are the leftist libertarians who make up one segment of the larger libertarian population (that clown, Bill Maher, is one of the more prominent examples).
That being said, I am shocked that one of Reason's writers is actually in favor of a global, carbon tax. WTF is he doing as a Reason contributor?
For your perusal...
Yeah but the fact that every party has its spoil sports don't matter to the GOP diehards. They'll commence with the obligatory Libertarian bashing and ad-hominems, conveniently ignoring big-government globalists * cough James Baker cough * that infest the GOP also.
Only someone smoking dope could believe that a 'world government' is possible, or even desirable. The idea is not worthy of serious discussion.
I remember a Virginia Libertarian running for office who supported some gun bans. From what I've seen of Libertarian candidates they are not always consistent with their principals.
They're not. A lot of them are kooky fringers, unfortunately.
High taxes are great,
just observe our freinds at the DU,
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3005245
Quote " Last Updated: Wednesday, December 6, 2006 | 12:44 PM ET
CBC News
People who live in countries with higher taxes enjoy lower rates of poverty, have more equal income distribution, more economic security for workers and can expect to live longer, suggests a new study from a left-leaning think tank.
Written by two Toronto tax law professors for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the report released Wednesday, is blunt.
"Tax cuts are disastrous for the well-being of a nation's citizens," say authors Neil Brooks and Thaddeus Hwong.
The study compares four high-tax Nordic countries (Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland) with six low-tax Anglo-American countries (the U.K., U.S., Canada, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand).
The four Nordic countries scored better than the lower-taxed countries on most of the 50 indicators measured in the report, including:
* Rate of poverty, equality of income distribution, and economic security for workers.
* GDP per capita.
* Rate of household saving and net national saving.
* Innovation, including percentage of GDP spent on research and development.
* Growth competitiveness as ranked by the World Economic Forum.
* Rates of secondary school and university completion.
* Rate of drug use.
* Leisure time.
***
more: http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2006/12/06/tax-policyalte...
Some good reading in this article. " endQuote
I agree. Much of the libertarian party has been infiltrated by democrats who use the party to basically support the left side of their agenda (drug use etc) while dropping the more conservative stances (anti-affirmative action, school choice) and also diverting votes from republicans. I quit the Libertarian party after its disgraceful anti-war rhetoric and the fact that once democrat operatives took over the georgia libertarian party they not only dropped the more conservative stance of the party but added a loyalty oath that had to be signed before joining the state party.
These a-holes are pimping for Kyoto in drag. So much for small government, eh libertarians?
In Indiana they (The Libertarian Party) Essentially ran a Democrat as their nominee for US Senate against Senator Richard Lugar.
I didn't vote for either. I don't know why they let this liberal former Democrat run as their nominee..all I can say is Democratic infiltration. I say the Libertarians should return the favor..
Anybody that calls Reason a libertarian magazine has an unreasonable view of reality. It's not.
They won't be able to keep it lit.
That's got to be some wicked-nasty smoking material. Ordinary marijuana, while classified as a mild hallucinogen, isn't capable of producing such an extreme level of fantasy.
Then what good are they?
Communists know a target when they see one.
No wonder KOS was trying to attract them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.