NOW Do You See How Big Government Hurts People – Again?

March 3, 2012 by Leave a Comment

Something must be in the water. Hot on the heels of the Komen/Planned Parenthood debacle, we are seeing yet another high-profile example of big government bullying its way into places it is not wanted or needed, stomping on people’s freedom all along the way. In this latest example, the victims are Catholics.

Regardless of how one feels about the Catholic church and their views on contraception, any person who truly believes in freedom must agree that it is the right of Catholics to practice their religion as they see fit. It is not up to others, especially government, to tell anyone how they should believe or how they should practice their beliefs. It is a core founding principle of this country, affirmed in the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …” It seems pretty clear to me, “Congress shall make NO law…” It’s not “Congress SHOULD make no law…” or “Congress shall make no law EXCEPT …” No law means NO LAW.

Yet some people think it is just fine for government to infringe on people’s religious rights, conveniently ignoring that government’s only just and proper role is to PROTECT rights. Often people will justify the infringements because they don’t agree with the position of the religion being violated. In this case, many people (including many Catholics themselves, if we are to believe the figures being reported) do not believe in the Catholic church’s position on contraception. So when government is forcing all employers, regardless of religious affiliation, to provide contraceptive insurance coverage, the overt trampling of rights is considered no problem to some people because they don’t agree with the Catholic church.

Of course, this works out just fine for people until it is their own rights being infringed. At which point of course they’ll cry foul and expect others to come to their defense. But how can we except our own rights to be protected when we advocate the trampling of others’ rights – either explicitly or implicitly? I’m not sure which is worse, to explicitly advocate for the infringements of others’ freedom, or to implicitly legitimize that infringement by staying silent.

A famous quote often attributed to Voltaire comes to mind, “I do not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” I personally do not agree with the Catholic’s church’s position on contraception. But I will defend their right to hold that position, just as I will defend anyone else’s rights on any subject.

If you claim to truly believe in freedom, you can not suspend that belief just because you don’t agree with the way others exercise their freedom. To do so makes one an insincere hypocrite. Perhaps it is time some people reexamine just what they truly believe.

Filed Under: Liberty

Going Postal

March 3, 2012 by Leave a Comment
Pony Express

Hey, maybe this is better for customers too!

I’m sure most of you have seen the commercial the US Postal Service has been running on TV lately. The one where they say, “A refrigerator has never been hacked. An on-line virus has never attacked a cork board.” When I first saw it, I honestly couldn’t believe what I was seeing. It was so ludicrous that I wondered if it was a joke. Sadly, it was no joke. The postal service wants to encourage businesses to send more paper statements and receipts. Perhaps their next commercial will encourage people to use typewriters instead of computers. Or horse-and-buggy instead of cars. Heck, let’s just stop using electricity too.

Again, this commercial is just so ludicrous, it really isn’t worthy of rebuttal. So I’ll just do it for pure entertainment. First, here is the transcript of the entire commercial:

A refrigerator has never been hacked. An on-line virus has never attacked a cork board. Give your customers the added feeling of security a printed statement or receipt provides – with mail. It’s good for business, and even better for your customers. For safe and secure ways to stay connected, visit USPS.com/mail.

Let’s start with the specifics. Sure, no refrigerators have ever been hacked. But how is this relevant? The premise of the commercial is that a printed statement or receipt is more secure – or at least it gives an added “feeling” of security. So the USPS is basically saying that e-mailed statements or receipts are at risk of being hacked. I wonder how they think this might happen exactly? I don’t believe there are any documented cases of private information being compromised from a “hacking” incident targeting e-mailed statements or receipts. If we follow the logic of the post office all the way through, computers are far too risky to store personal information. We might as well stop using computers altogether because they just might get hacked.

Similarly, they claim that viruses put e-mailed documents at risk. Really? Exactly how? Are there any documented cases of viruses that compromised private information through e-mailed statements or receipts? This is just the USPS grasping at straws. Basically, if we again use the logic the post office is offering, we should simply stop using computers for everything because the risk of viruses is simply too great.

Sending paper through mail is good for businesses? Simply ridiculous. Besides the cost of postage, paper, and ink, the labor and equipment to produce and mail out paper statements is significant. Smart businesses long ago recognized this and incentivized their customers to use electronic billing and statements instead. And are we really going to take business advice from an organization that is bleeding red ink?

Finally, this ad finishes up by saying that paper statements are good for customers and implies that postal mail is safe and secure. Sure, because printed statements contain no personal information that identity thieves love to get their hands on and envelopes are impregnable fortresses of privacy. No, here in the really-real world, postal theft and dumpster-diving are some of the most common ways that people become victims of identity theft. Experts highly recommend shredding documents with sensitive information on them before throwing them away, especially all the junk mail credit card offers. Of course, if you were receiving e-mailed statements you could just hit delete on your keyboard, but apparently paper is “better for customers”.

Overall, the premise of this commercial is just so bad that it is almost insulting. Who exactly does the USPS think this ad is going to convince? People who are still using postal mail aren’t the target of this commercial. People who switched to electronic statements aren’t likely to switch back. And businesses aren’t going to encourage their customers to go back to paper. This commercial really just makes the USPS seem pitiful and desperate. I can’t imagine that this commercial generates ANY consumer confidence.

The postal service needs to realize that the era of paper mail is ending and adjust their business model – which will be highly difficult as long as they are a quasi-governmental organization. They need to focus on package delivery and run commercials like the funny “creepy clown doll” commercial if they have any chance of surviving past this decade.

Filed Under: Technology

NOW Do You See How Big Government Hurts People?

March 3, 2012 by 1 Comment

Komen CartoonAs the whole Komen Foundation/Planned Parenthood debacle has wound down, I thought it would be appropriate to take a look back at the whole situation with a slightly different point of view. So far, this has been one of the biggest stories of the year. Yet while most people were busy laying blame, they missed the bigger picture.

Supporters of Planned Parenthood were crying foul, lighting up the social networks, claiming the decision was politically motivated. I agree the situation reeked of politics. But most people were focusing the blame everywhere but the root of the problem. Whether the accusations were being directed at Komen, Rep. Cliff Stearns, or the Republican party, it all missed the real mark. Each antagonist in this story are merely stray embers of a bigger fire; symptoms of a bigger disease. Above all, this entire situation was rooted in the destructive power of big government.

The firestorm was precipitated by a change in the policies of the The Komen Foundation. The new policy stated that Komen would not donate to organizations that were under investigation by local, state, or federal authorities. By itself this seemed like a reasonable policy for a charitable organization. One problem with this policy was that it assumed guilt, which they have now corrected. However, the bigger mistake the Komen Foundation made was in accepting the United States Congress as a legitimate law enforcement authority. Nothing in the constitution gives Congress the power to act as a de facto police force, and any implied investigative authority is to be confined to scrutiny of governmental function. By accepting big government trespass, Komen empowered big government to dictate their decision-making process. This potentially hurt the very people they claim they want to help and they got burned in the process.

Now many of you are thinking along the lines of “congress does investigations all the time – remember Mark McGwire and the whole steroids in baseball thing?” This is a discussion for another time, but are you really surprised when big government oversteps its bounds?

And that is exactly what is happening here. A politician with an agenda is poking his nose, and the force of government, where it arguably doesn’t belong. Now this happens all the time. It’s just that most people don’t know or don’t care because they believe government is working in their best interest. But the sword cuts both ways, and this time the sword has cut back against the grain – and incurred the wrath of women scorned.

The fallacy of big government is that its proponents believe government is motivated to “do the right thing”. On the contrary, almost all politicians are motivated to do what they think will keep them in office. This means catering to their political party and those who make large contributions to their campaigns. So it is usually the little guys who get hurt by big government programs. The problem is that usually the pain is not so obvious or so quick in coming. Rarely is the destructive power of big government so publicly put on display as it was here. My hope is that some people will take this opportunity to become more aware of the fallacy and damaging power of big government. Only when enough people come to this realization will we have any hope of turning back the tide of big government.

Filed Under: Liberty

Welcome to Life, Liberty, and Technology!

March 3, 2012 by Leave a Comment

Hello. My name is Marcel Brown. Welcome to my new blog!

On this blog I will share with the world the multitude of thoughts and ideas that regularly bounce around my head. “Life” is a big topic and I will write about a number of seemingly random topics that interest me. That being said, two of the topics most important to me are liberty (or freedom) and technology. So besides the random topics that come to mind, a great deal of what I write will revolve around the concepts of liberty and technology – and the ever increasing intersection between the two.

I’m sure many people will consider some of my writing controversial – in fact I guarantee it! That’s just fine with me. Too often we hold back our opinions due to fear of what other people will think. So if you aren’t open-minded, this may not be the blog for you. But if you like to exercise your mind by reading opinions that are perhaps a bit out of the box, welcome! We may not always agree but at least it won’t be boring!

Filed Under: Liberty, Life, Technology
« Previous Page