This Is Why We Have Libertarians

[g5000]

The Supreme Court blew a chance to fix its second-worst decision ever​

​

A woman who has a special needs child of her own is trying to create a business which provides respite care to other families with special needs children.

Respite care is where a caregiver watches over the children while the parents take a break to buy groceries, visit a doctor, etc.

This woman has been denied a license by the Louisiana Health Department. Their mandate is to determine if there is a "need" for such a business.

There most clearly is a need in the community, but the Health Department has decided they already have oversight over too many other businesses and just don't have the time or manpower to regulate another one.

From the link:

By what standard does it measure need? Its own needs. Incredibly, the department says that this barrier to entry into the caregiving field “self-evidently” serves the public interest by giving department bureaucrats fewer caregivers to scrutinize. Never mind any shortage of Louisiana respite care. Newell-Davis is denied government’s permission to practice her craft so that government can conserve its regulatory energies. She cannot work at all so that the bureaucrats can work less than they otherwise would.


George Will makes a very good case that this is a clear violation of the "privileges or immunities" clause of the 14th amendment.


I agree.


Here are some thoughts from the chief author of the 14th amendment:

Liberty, our own American constitutional liberty, is the right “to know, to argue, and to utter freely according to conscience.” It is the liberty, sir, to know your duty and to do it. It is the liberty, sir, to work in an honest calling and contribute by your toil in some sort to the support of yourself, to the support of your fellow-men, and to be secure in the enjoyment of the fruits of your toil. Justice, sir, to establish which this Constitution was ordained, the people themselves being witness, is to give every man his due. The justice to be established by the Constitution is the attribute of God, as to do justice is the perpetual obligation of men and nations. Let justice for all, by the power and majesty of American law be established for all, so that th epoorest man in his hovel on the frontiers of your widely extended domain, bearing with him toward the setting sun the symbols of civilization, and laying in the wilderness the foundations of new commonwealths, may be made as secure in his person and property and the prince in his palace or the king on his throne.

https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4883&context=ndlr

Let's hope the US Supreme Court has the wisdom to right this wrong.

 

[Thinker101]

The Supreme Court blew a chance to fix its second-worst decision ever​

​

A woman who has a special needs child of her own is trying to create a business which provides respite care to other families with special needs children.

Respite care is where a caregiver watches over the children while the parents take a break to buy groceries, visit a doctor, etc.

This woman has been denied a license by the Louisiana Health Department. Their mandate is to determine if there is a "need" for such a business.

There most clearly is a need in the community, but the Health Department has decided they already have oversight over too many other business and just don't have the time or manpower to regulate another one.

From the link:

By what standard does it measure need? Its own needs. Incredibly, the department says that this barrier to entry into the caregiving field “self-evidently” serves the public interest by giving department bureaucrats fewer caregivers to scrutinize. Never mind any shortage of Louisiana respite care. Newell-Davis is denied government’s permission to practice her craft so that government can conserve its regulatory energies. She cannot work at all so that the bureaucrats can work less than they otherwise would.


George Will makes a very good case that this is a clear violation of the "privileges or immunities" clause of the 14th amendment.


I agree.


Here are some thoughts from the chief author of the 14th amendment:

Liberty, our own American constitutional liberty, is the right “to know, to argue, and to utter freely according to conscience.” It is the liberty, sir, to know your duty and to do it. It is the liberty, sir, to work in an honest calling and contribute by your toil in some sort to the support of yourself, to the support of your fellow-men, and to be secure in the enjoyment of the fruits of your toil. Justice, sir, to establish which this Constitution was ordained, the people themselves being witness, is to give every man his due. The justice to be established by the Constitution is the attribute of God, as to do justice is the perpetual obligation of men and nations. Let justice for all, by the power and majesty of American law be established for all, so that th epoorest man in his hovel on the frontiers of your widely extended domain, bearing with him toward the setting sun the symbols of civilization, and laying in the wilderness the foundations of new commonwealths, may be made as secure in his person and property and the prince in his palace or the king on his throne.

https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4883&context=ndlr

Let's hope the US Supreme Court has the wisdom to right this wrong.

Great, next you can tell us the one about how you're a libertarian.

 

[g5000]

Great, next you can tell us the one about how you're a libertarian.

I have too much common sense to be a Libertarian. I do have a wide libertarian streak, though, and I voted for Jo Jorgensen in 2020.

 

[g5000]

If I was a jaded person, I might think the woman is being blocked entry into the respite care business because other respite care businesses own the Health Department and don't want competition.

Oh, wait. I AM a jaded person!

 

[progressive hunter]

The Supreme Court blew a chance to fix its second-worst decision ever​

​

A woman who has a special needs child of her own is trying to create a business which provides respite care to other families with special needs children.

Respite care is where a caregiver watches over the children while the parents take a break to buy groceries, visit a doctor, etc.

This woman has been denied a license by the Louisiana Health Department. Their mandate is to determine if there is a "need" for such a business.

There most clearly is a need in the community, but the Health Department has decided they already have oversight over too many other businesses and just don't have the time or manpower to regulate another one.

From the link:

By what standard does it measure need? Its own needs. Incredibly, the department says that this barrier to entry into the caregiving field “self-evidently” serves the public interest by giving department bureaucrats fewer caregivers to scrutinize. Never mind any shortage of Louisiana respite care. Newell-Davis is denied government’s permission to practice her craft so that government can conserve its regulatory energies. She cannot work at all so that the bureaucrats can work less than they otherwise would.


George Will makes a very good case that this is a clear violation of the "privileges or immunities" clause of the 14th amendment.


I agree.


Here are some thoughts from the chief author of the 14th amendment:

Liberty, our own American constitutional liberty, is the right “to know, to argue, and to utter freely according to conscience.” It is the liberty, sir, to know your duty and to do it. It is the liberty, sir, to work in an honest calling and contribute by your toil in some sort to the support of yourself, to the support of your fellow-men, and to be secure in the enjoyment of the fruits of your toil. Justice, sir, to establish which this Constitution was ordained, the people themselves being witness, is to give every man his due. The justice to be established by the Constitution is the attribute of God, as to do justice is the perpetual obligation of men and nations. Let justice for all, by the power and majesty of American law be established for all, so that th epoorest man in his hovel on the frontiers of your widely extended domain, bearing with him toward the setting sun the symbols of civilization, and laying in the wilderness the foundations of new commonwealths, may be made as secure in his person and property and the prince in his palace or the king on his throne.

https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4883&context=ndlr

Let's hope the US Supreme Court has the wisdom to right this wrong.

the constitution should cover that,,

 

[Crepitus]

The Supreme Court blew a chance to fix its second-worst decision ever​

​

A woman who has a special needs child of her own is trying to create a business which provides respite care to other families with special needs children.

Respite care is where a caregiver watches over the children while the parents take a break to buy groceries, visit a doctor, etc.

This woman has been denied a license by the Louisiana Health Department. Their mandate is to determine if there is a "need" for such a business.

There most clearly is a need in the community, but the Health Department has decided they already have oversight over too many other businesses and just don't have the time or manpower to regulate another one.

From the link:

By what standard does it measure need? Its own needs. Incredibly, the department says that this barrier to entry into the caregiving field “self-evidently” serves the public interest by giving department bureaucrats fewer caregivers to scrutinize. Never mind any shortage of Louisiana respite care. Newell-Davis is denied government’s permission to practice her craft so that government can conserve its regulatory energies. She cannot work at all so that the bureaucrats can work less than they otherwise would.


George Will makes a very good case that this is a clear violation of the "privileges or immunities" clause of the 14th amendment.


I agree.


Here are some thoughts from the chief author of the 14th amendment:

Liberty, our own American constitutional liberty, is the right “to know, to argue, and to utter freely according to conscience.” It is the liberty, sir, to know your duty and to do it. It is the liberty, sir, to work in an honest calling and contribute by your toil in some sort to the support of yourself, to the support of your fellow-men, and to be secure in the enjoyment of the fruits of your toil. Justice, sir, to establish which this Constitution was ordained, the people themselves being witness, is to give every man his due. The justice to be established by the Constitution is the attribute of God, as to do justice is the perpetual obligation of men and nations. Let justice for all, by the power and majesty of American law be established for all, so that th epoorest man in his hovel on the frontiers of your widely extended domain, bearing with him toward the setting sun the symbols of civilization, and laying in the wilderness the foundations of new commonwealths, may be made as secure in his person and property and the prince in his palace or the king on his throne.

https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4883&context=ndlr

Let's hope the US Supreme Court has the wisdom to right this wrong.

As the parent of a special needs kid I am absolutely gobsmacked.

 

[g5000]

the constitution should cover that,,

It does. The 14th Amendment.

 

[progressive hunter]

It does. The 14th Amendment.

so where do libertarians come into it??

 

[g5000]

so where do libertarians come into it??

This is just the kind of thing which pisses off libertarians.

 

[progressive hunter]

This is just the kind of thing which pisses off libertarians.

this is the kind of thing that pisses off most people,, some need to be in private to admit it,,

 

[Billy000]

The Supreme Court blew a chance to fix its second-worst decision ever​

​

A woman who has a special needs child of her own is trying to create a business which provides respite care to other families with special needs children.

Respite care is where a caregiver watches over the children while the parents take a break to buy groceries, visit a doctor, etc.

This woman has been denied a license by the Louisiana Health Department. Their mandate is to determine if there is a "need" for such a business.

There most clearly is a need in the community, but the Health Department has decided they already have oversight over too many other businesses and just don't have the time or manpower to regulate another one.

From the link:

By what standard does it measure need? Its own needs. Incredibly, the department says that this barrier to entry into the caregiving field “self-evidently” serves the public interest by giving department bureaucrats fewer caregivers to scrutinize. Never mind any shortage of Louisiana respite care. Newell-Davis is denied government’s permission to practice her craft so that government can conserve its regulatory energies. She cannot work at all so that the bureaucrats can work less than they otherwise would.


George Will makes a very good case that this is a clear violation of the "privileges or immunities" clause of the 14th amendment.


I agree.


Here are some thoughts from the chief author of the 14th amendment:

Liberty, our own American constitutional liberty, is the right “to know, to argue, and to utter freely according to conscience.” It is the liberty, sir, to know your duty and to do it. It is the liberty, sir, to work in an honest calling and contribute by your toil in some sort to the support of yourself, to the support of your fellow-men, and to be secure in the enjoyment of the fruits of your toil. Justice, sir, to establish which this Constitution was ordained, the people themselves being witness, is to give every man his due. The justice to be established by the Constitution is the attribute of God, as to do justice is the perpetual obligation of men and nations. Let justice for all, by the power and majesty of American law be established for all, so that th epoorest man in his hovel on the frontiers of your widely extended domain, bearing with him toward the setting sun the symbols of civilization, and laying in the wilderness the foundations of new commonwealths, may be made as secure in his person and property and the prince in his palace or the king on his throne.

https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4883&context=ndlr

Let's hope the US Supreme Court has the wisdom to right this wrong.

How does one define libertarian? Do I think personal freedom is important? Yes. Do I think laissez faire capitalism is a good idea? Absolutely not.

 

[g5000]

How does one define libertarian? Do I think personal freedom is important? Yes. Do I think laissez faire capitalism is a good idea? Absolutely not.

What are your thoughts on taxi cab medallions and the impact ride sharing companies have had on the value of those medallions, causing them to radically decrease?

 

[Billy000]

What are your thoughts on taxi cab medallions and the impact ride sharing companies have had on the value of those medallions, causing them to radically decrease?

I’m afraid I do not have a comment on that because I have no idea what you’re talking about.

 

[Synthaholic]

How does one define libertarian?

 

[Billy000]

View attachment 845081

Lol this is brilliant.

 

[g5000]

I’m afraid I do not have a comment on that because I have no idea what you’re talking about.

Metropolitan governments restrict the number of taxis allowed on the road. They do this by issuing medallions to authorized taxis.

This creates a government-made shortage of taxis instead of allowing the market to decide how many taxis are needed on the road.

As a result, taxi medallions used to sell for upwards of a million dollars at auction in some cities.

Trump's fixer Michael Cohen owned a portfolio of these medallions.

Over time, the value of these medallions rose as the supply of taxis was not keeping up with the demand.

It was a very common practice for the owners of million dollar medallions to take out loans against those assets. Michael Cohen was one.

This was an inflated asset class created by government interference in the free market.

And then came Uber.

Uber was a giant threat to those who owned those medallions. They had a government-manufactured monopoly and they did everything they could to stop Uber from horning in on their business.

But the free market won out. WE won out.

Now those medallions aren't worth as much any more now that their monopoly is busted. And those who took out loans against them when they were worth a lot more are now upside down on those loans.

Michael Cohen is one of them. His 17 medallions are worth about 20% of what they were worth just a few short years ago.

The next time you get in a yellow cab, look for one of these riveted to the body of the cab:

 

[eagle1462010]

If the business had no one needing it, then no one would use it and it would fail.

I know plenty of single dads who would love this kind of business when they need to take care of issues.

 

[g5000]

If the business had no one needing it, then no one would use it and it would fail.

Precisely. Yet the government is deciding what caregiver services you need or don't need.

Outrageous.

I know plenty of single dads who would love this kind of business when they need to take care of issues.

There was a time when I, too, could have used this.

 

[Billy000]

Metropolitan governments restrict the number of taxis allowed on the road. They do this by issuing medallions to authorized taxis.

This creates a government-made shortage of taxis instead of allowing the market to decide how many taxis are needed on the road.

As a result, taxi medallions used to sell for upwards of a million dollars at auction in some cities.

Trump's fixer Michael Cohen owned a portfolio of these medallions.

Over time, the value of these medallions rose as the supply of taxis was not keeping up with the demand.

It was a very common practice for the owners of million dollar medallions to take out loans against those assets. Michael Cohen was one.

This was an inflated asset class created by government interference in the free market.

And then came Uber.

Uber was a giant threat to those who owned those medallions. They had a government-manufactured monopoly and they did everything they could to stop Uber from horning in on their business.

But the free market won out. WE won out.

Now those medallions aren't worth as much any more now that their monopoly is busted. And those who took out loans against them when they were worth a lot more are now upside down on those loans.

Michael Cohen is one of them. His 17 medallions are worth about 20% of what they were worth just a few short years ago.

The next time you get in a yellow cab, look for one of these riveted to the body of the cab:

Okay here’s my question. Why did the government want to do that in the first place? What was the aim according to them?

 

[g5000]

Okay here’s my question. Why did the government want to do that in the first place? What was the aim according to them?

The sole purpose was to limit the number of taxis on the street. That's. It.

What they achieved was to cause a speculative bubble in medallions instead. And now that bubble has popped with the arrival of Uber, and the medallion owners find themselves in debt they cannot repay.