We are all familiar with the sad tale of battered women who keeping taking their abuser back because they fear they have no place else to go, until eventually, their abuser kills them. It is heartbreaking for Libertarians to watch our friends in the Tea Party and other liberty activist groups in the GOP follow that same dismal path. Read the rest of this entry »
The Tidewater Libertarian Party has released the following Statement on Attorney General Mark Herring’s decision to oppose, in Federal Court, the State’s Amendment refusing to recognize same-sex marriage.
OUR UNFAITHFUL SERVANT
The Tidewater Libertarian Party strongly opposed Virginia’s Amendment refusing to recognize same-sex marriage before it was ratified, and continues to advocate its repeal. Until that happens, it is the law in Virginia and an expression of the will of the people of the Commonwealth. If the Amendment were to be struck down as in conflict with the US Constitution, we would celebrate its fall. But until that happens, it remains Virginia’s law.
Mark Herring ran for and narrowly won the office of Attorney General, effectively, Virginia’s lawyer. It is his duty to represent the will of the people of Virginia, even if he disagrees with their choice. Read the rest of this entry »
A Statement by the Tidewater Libertarian Party
The financial risks and costs of Medicaid expansion for Virginia are well documented in other sources, so leaving those aside, we, in the Tidewater Libertarian Party will address the objections to Medicaid expansion based on economic principle.
Currently, through Medicare, Medicaid and current and veteran Military health care programs, government at all levels controls 45% of health care in the United States. Medicaid expansion will further increase the government share of health care control. Read the rest of this entry »
The Tidewater Libertarian Party has released the following statement:
Authority for Military Action
Our Constitution vests the Congress with the sole power to authorize acts of war. The form of that authorization is not specified. In 1973, the Congress, recognizing that a more rapid response might in some cases be necessary in the modern world, passed the War Powers Resolution which gives the President authorization to act prior to Congressional action under certain very limited circumstances.
President Obama has called for an increase in the Minimum Wage,making the claim that it would be good for business because those receiving the higher wage would have more to spend. Higher demand would lead to increased consumption. That boon is easy to see, but serious policy makers must also consider the less visible consequences.
Where does the money for the raise come from?
No business has a money tree from which to pluck dollars, the raise must be accounted for either by reducing the wages of other employees or the number of employees, reducing their consumption, or raising the prices of the company’s products or services, leaving the customers with less to spend somewhere else, or from the business owner(s) pockets, reducing their consumption, or investment in their own business, or those of others through stock purchases, reducing the consumption of those businesses or their employees.
In every case, the increased consumption by minimum wage earners comes at the expense of reduced consumption by someone else. There is no net benefit to the economy.
Increased wages can bring true increases in consumption and economic growth only if they are the result of increased wealth creation by the employee.
Either the President is being guided by extremely simplistic economic theory or he is simply pandering and hoping no one will notice the fallacy. Neither option is encouraging.
The President’s advisers should point out to him that ‘pulling oneself up by his bootstraps’ is only a figure of speech.