Thursday, 27 December 2007

The Civil War was not started because of slavery

One of the common myths that American kids are taught in school is that the Civil War was fought over slavery.  That's incorrect: the war was not started because of the North's objection to the institution of slavery. During his inaugural address, Lincoln said he would not interfere with slavery wherever it existed, and the south abolished African slave trade as part of the Confederate Constitution. Slavery was also legal in the north during the war.

The war was started because the north tried to impose heavy tariffs on the south. When the south refused to pay, the north responded by threatening to blockade southern ports -- which is an act of war.

[[MORE]]
From http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/pearlston1.html :
The Republican platform of 1860 called for higher tariffs; that was implemented by the new Congress in the Morill tariff of March 1861, signed by President Buchanan before Lincoln took the oath of office. It imposed the highest tariffs in US history, with over a 50% duty on iron products and 25% on clothing; rates averaged 47%. The nascent Confederacy followed with a low tariff, essentially creating a free-trade zone in the South. Prior to this "war of the tariffs", most Northern newspapers had called for peace through conciliation, but many now cried for war. The Philadelphia Press on 18 March 1861 demanded a blockade of Southern ports, because, if not, "a series of customs houses will be required on the vast inland border from the Atlantic to West Texas. Worse still, with no protective tariff, European goods will under-price Northern goods in Southern markets. Cotton for Northern mills will be charged an export tax. This will cripple the clothing industries and make British mills prosper. Finally, the great inland waterways, the Mississippi, the Missouri, and the Ohio Rivers, will be subject to Southern tolls."

Also see: http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/civilwar.html

The slavery issue was raised by Lincoln later, as a way to create support for the war. In fact, slavery was already on its way out, and would have faded away on its own without the war.

Wednesday, 26 December 2007

Motivations for moving to New Zealand

I moved from California (Silicon Valley) to New Zealand in Dec 2006, with my wife and two kids.

NZ is 65% the size of California, but only has 10% of the population. Housing is less expensive, property taxes are 95% lower, there are no death taxes, no capital gains taxes on the sale of your home, and it's beautiful and relatively unpolluted. I'm new to NZ politics, but so far it seems much more under control than in the US. Special interests don't seem to dominate things here.

[[MORE]]
They do have socialized medicine -- but there's also a parallel private system that allows you to opt-out of the public one if you want to. Taxes are high -- but at least the tax forms and associated tax law are extremely simple in comparison to the US (the annual tax return is only about 4 pages long). The overall tax rates aren't directly comparable, but I'm sure I'll pay less here overall than I would in the US.

I haven't found the government to be anywhere near as intrusive as in the US. In foreign policy, they have been solidly against the war in the Iraq. Many laws are relatively lax compared to the US -- gambling is legal, the drinking age is 18, minimum age for a driver's license is 15, etc. It's legal to own guns here, although it requires a license. The courts don't allow the type of distorted settlements that happen regularly in the US. Million-dollar awards for "damages" are unheard of. For example, in an auto accident case, the person who was hurt is likely to be awarded lost wages plus a little extra. The result is that insurance costs much less than in the US.

My overall sense of New Zealanders is that they understand and support the idea of personal responsibility -- something that was lost in the US a long time ago.

Native Kiwis, please let me know if I'm off-track, or if any of this resonates with you.

Although I was attracted to NZ, I also felt driven away from the US. Who wants to live in a country that a large part of the rest of the world hates? That's a situation that isn't likely to end well. I don't want my tax dollars to continue to be used to support perpetual wars of aggression. The level of government intrusion and the loss of respect for personal liberty is really crazy.

Thursday, 20 December 2007

How to abolish the Fed?

G. Edward Griffin, in his book "The Creature from Jekyll Island", outlines a plan for eliminating the Federal Reserve. Although I don't agree with his bi-metalism, it's otherwise a well thought-out approach, and nothing in it would be especially time consuming. Here's a short summary, modified slightly to reflect a gold-focused approach instead:

[[MORE]]

  1. Repeal the legal tender laws

  2. Define a "new" dollar in terms of gold

  3. Restore free coinage at the US Mint (where you can bring in raw gold and exchange it for gold coins)

  4. Pay off the Federal Debt with Federal Reserve Notes created for that purpose

  5. Freeze the supply of Federal Reserve Notes

  6. Pledge the government's hoard of gold to be used as backing for all FRNs in circulation

  7. Determine the weight of all gold owned by the US Government and calculate the total value of that supply in terms of new dollars

  8. Determine the number of FRNs in circulation and calculate the new dollar value of each one by dividing the value of the precious metals by the number of notes

  9. Retire all FRNs from circulation by offering to exchange them for new dollars at the calculated ratio

  10. Convert all contracts based on FRNs to new dollars at the same ratio

  11. Issue gold certificates. In exchange for FRNs, recipients will have the option of taking coins or Treasury Certificates, which are 100% backed (the certificates will become the new paper currency)

  12. Abolish the Federal Reserve System. It would be possible to allow it to continue to operate as a check-clearinghouse, but not as a central bank

  13. Introduce free banking. Banks should be deregulated and cut loose from Federal bailouts. The FDIC and other similar organizations should be phased out. Banks should be required to keep 100% reserves for demand deposits

About the War on Terror

The "War on Terror" has nothing to do with terrorism. It's a tactic that helps facilitate a larger, more intrusive, more corrupt government. Like the wars on crime, drugs and poverty, by definition its a war that can never be won.

[[MORE]]Terrorism is defined as hurting or killing innocent civilians. The US has now killed more than a million Iraqi civilians. That's not "fighting terrorism". That's becoming terrorists ourselves. Leaving Iraq has nothing to do with "cut and run". It's an unjust war of aggression -- the same crime that the Nazi leaders were convicted of during the Nuremburg trials. The real reason for the Iraq war is control over the Iraqi oil fields. Is that something that Americans should feel bad about abandoning?