He Believes!

Interesting... On Credit!

Open immigration

But the moral case for open immigration is paramount. That case is this: a geopolitical border is a grotesquely arbitrary reason to prevent people from dealing with each other in whatever peaceful ways they choose.

Also, why should one be constrained by choices one didn't make? One doesn't choose to be born in a certain place. Of course, we are constrained by circumstances, many beyond our control. However, why should laws and political boundaries constrain individuals?

Who pays for that?

Why me?

Raj Thackeray, a terrorist!

Terrorism

Q) Is Raj Thackeray a terrorist?

A) Yes!

Absolutely Indecent!

http://www.ibnlive.com/news/girl-set-on-fire-for-wearing-lipstick--govt-fumes/76182-3.html

Meanwhile, Woman and Child Development Minister, Renuka Chaudhary said, "Lawmakers should such people a lesson. There is no law in the country that states that a girl cannot wear something unless it is absolutely indecent. It is very shocking, backward and illiterate.

I am sure the "nana" thought that applying lipstick was absolutely indecent, infact in his opinion, and I must add he is not alone, all indecent girls should be molested and burnt. Renuka is no different, she too has a definition of indecent albeit a different one!

I am not too sure how and why are the decent so easily worried by the indecent... 

How can the law punish the indecent for what is a weakness of the decent? On what basis does the law decide what is decent? In my opinion that should be an individual's choice. 

It should be against the law to force another individual to live by ones definition of decency!

Saluting the genius!

The Little Master who was born to runs - Cricket, Sport - The Independent:

"It is 10 years since India Today reported: 'When he goes out to bat people switch on their TV sets and switch off their lives.'"

Joe the Outlaw

Joe the Outlaw by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

The idea of licensing is that it assures quality standards. But this is just a cover used by guilds since the Middle Ages. The real goal of licensing is to create a professional cartel. Fewer providers means higher wages for those with licenses. It is all about boosting income by restricting competition. This is of course a violation of human rights because it impinges on the fundamental freedom of association

Does just being born in a country give you greater right to opportunity available in the country (a sort of license to opportunity)? Should people not born in a country have restricted access to opportunity available in the country? Should barriers to entry be created for people not born in the country?

Will she talk of her responsibility?

The chief minister of Delhi speaking her mind. What a good example she is of the rot that governs India!

"All by herself at three in the morning in a city that is believed to be unsafe...is being adventurous," Dikshit had said.

"Barely twenty-four hours later, the CM told CNN-IBN in an exclusive interview that the employers were morally responsible for the safety and security of employees working in round-the-clock jobs."

A city that is believed to be unsafe, and whose chief minister is Madam Dikshit! Will she talk of her responsibility?