Around the blogs

This week has seen another rich harvest of good reading in the blogosphere. Among the articles that caught my eye:


1. Courtesy of a link at Earthbound Misfit, I came across this scathing denunciation of the TSA by a retired FBI agent. His opening paragraph says it all:

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) was formed to ensure America’s freedom to travel. Instead, they have made air travel the most difficult means of mass transit in the United States, at the same time failing to make air travel any more secure.

From my own perspective as a former security professional, I completely agree with his assessment.


2. The Tireless Agorist explains how the 'general welfare' provision (Article 1, Section 8) of the US Constitution has been reinterpreted, and its original conception eroded, by the Supreme Court from 1936 onward. He refers to it as 'Hijacking the General Welfare Clause'. Very interesting reading, albeit from a narrow perspective. It's certainly inspired me to undertake further investigation of the subject.


3. Rogue Classicism brings us a very interesting look at how books (or scrolls) were sold in ancient Rome. Even though the printing press would not be invented for centuries yet, many aspects of the Roman 'publishing' scene appear not dissimilar to our own era - complete with the frustrations of contemporary authors!


4. Daddybear has 'A Modest Proposal' about how to make NASCAR racing more interesting. In the light of the past week's ferocious weather, I particularly appreciated his third suggestion:

Race unless there are tornadoes in the area. Rain, shine, snow, whatever. Bootleggers had to get the moonshine to market no matter what, so today's drivers can do it.

5. Warren Meyer, writing at Coyote Blog, points out that "... we have now entered the era of post-modern science, where writers on scientific ethics now conclude that its OK for scientists to lie as long as they are on the right team". Sickeningly, I can't disagree with his assessment of the situation. Whatever happened to integrity, honesty and ethical behavior?


6. The Economic Collapse Blog is more than a little alarmist and Chicken Little-ish in its analysis of economic events; but the author may be more correct, more often, than I'm prepared to concede. Only time will tell. However, I can't argue with one of his latest articles: 'Inflation Is A Tax And The Federal Reserve Is Taxing The Living Daylights Out Of Us'. A brief excerpt:

Inflation is an especially insidious tax because it is not just a tax on your income for one year. It is a continual tax on every single dollar that you own. As your money sits in the bank, it is constantly losing value. Over time, the effects of inflation can be absolutely devastating. For example, if you put 100 dollars in the bank in 1970, those same dollars today would only have about 17 percent of the purchasing power that they did back then. In essence, you were hit by an 83 percent "inflation tax" and all you did was leave your money in the bank. So who is responsible for this? Well, the Federal Reserve controls monetary policy in the United States, and the inflationary monetary policy that the Fed has gotten all of us accustomed to is taxing the living daylights out of us. This is madness, and it needs to stop.

7. Dr. Whitecoat points out that, particularly in the field of emergency medical care, "When governments pay for certain outcomes and not for others, the governments are guaranteed to get the outcomes they pay for". He points out that attempts to reform the system frequently have unexpected consequences, and can in fact make things much worse.


8. James Bloodworth, a British writer blogging at the Independent, claims that 'The prohibition of drugs has been an abject failure with a devastating human cost'. I can't disagree with his well-documented argument . . . but equally, I can't (yet) support the legalization of currently-illegal narcotics, for fear that the cure may be worse than the disease. I don't have an answer, but Mr. Bloodworth provides a useful transatlantic perspective on the issue, and worthwhile food for thought.


9. Finally, Dr. Grumpy describes a particular form of dangerous driver. Even the description might be dangerous, under the right (or wrong) circumstances!


That's all for this week. More soon!



Peter