A way to know if a conservative is Racist


Just ask 3 questions

1) Do you have more in common with, and are you personally more comfortable in the company of, a white leftist or a black conservative?

2) Would you rather have nine white leftists or nine black conservatives on the U.S. Supreme Court?

3) Would you rather your child marry a black Christian conservative or a white non-Christian liberal?

Does Socialism Increase Inequality

Sometimes I wonder if “socialism” actually increase inequality rather than reduce it.

Socialist California is rich. I give them that. There are billionaires and there are homeless people.

Texans? It’s probably more moderate.

North korea? China? Venezuela? They’re not equally poor. However, they’re equal in another way. Huge inequality.

In Venezuela the president eat steaks from Salt Bae restaurants while the people are poor.

Wants equality? Why not try capitalism. It works better for both prosperity and equality. Okay I may be biased.

Socialism leads to big government and big government leads to redistribution of wealth to cronies. So there is a reasonable reasoning behind it.

Capitalism? Everyone have the same chance. Anyone can open their own microsoft, google, and so on. So no body can make a lot of money too easily because then they have to compete.

Nobody can be too poor too easily because they can just see what the rich do and do the same thing.

Often it’s governments regulation, that comes in the form of licensings that restrict trades that prevent the poor from catching up to the rich.

Black kids sell drugs and earn less than minimum wage. Their death rates is higher than death rates in death row and they do it for less than minimum wage.

In other word, even if you’re convicted, of being a hit man, you will have longer life expectancy than some black kids selling drugs because they can’t have minimum wage jobs. That’s minimum wage 101 for you.

They told some researcher that they want to quit selling drugs if they can get one of those “dream” minimum wage job. However, those minimum wage job is there to keep them out of job. You can read more from freakonomics.

That is just another case how socialism creates instant inequality. That will justify more socialism that’ll create more inequality that will justify more socialism.

How to Make Tax Simpler

Paying taxes is like going to a shop. Goods are not free. The same way there is no country without tax.

However, we don’t shop in shops that ask us to fill long forms every time we buy some stuff. Why? Because we can just move around to other shops.

Shops that make paying difficult will lost customers and don’t make more money.

So why are taxes rules are complicated?

I think about 40%-90% of the true cost of tax is not in the amount people pay but in resources used to calculate and minimize those taxes.

For example. Government tax income. So to pay fewer income taxes, Bob works less. Now the government collects $10k a year. The economy as a whole lost $100k. So about $90k of money just evaporate so the government can collect that $10k.

Things can go even worse when Bob, not wanting to lick statist boots, choose not to work at all and be on welfare as a protest. Now Bob is happy because suckers are licking his boots instead.

Or Bob can commit suicide to avoid paying taxes. There goes another milking cow. Bob may even want to bring as many people with him in some big explosion. Tax sucks. Shit happens when tax is big and complex and unfair.

British empire actually spend more on collecting taxes from it’s colonies than what they get. There’s a reason why they give up so quickly when the colonies want independence.

Taxation is theft and taxpayers often fight back with torch and pitchforks.

Or Bob can have a brother in other country providing for Bob. Bob don’t work and get money from his bro in tax havens. No income no taxes.

We see this happening in big corporation. Google has a “bro” in ireland and hence don’t pay taxes in US. Google USA is a subsidiary of Google ireland I think.

Governments get nothing anyway, and a lot of economic activity moves to Ireland. For almost nothing government get, Google spend a lot of money on lawyers to dodge it. We’re talking about 99% inefficiency here.

I think there is a way to make tax simpler. Instead of taxing individuals, why can’t countries like Indonesia or USA tax “provinces” or “states.” The tax can be based on governments’ expenditure on the state.

Some small portion may be based on GDP or total land value to attract progressive minded voters. All those are easy to compute.

Then, instead of filing and checking millions of tax returns and forms, the IRS can check 50 tax returns. Each is filled by the state governors. Simpler.

Then, let the states figure out how to pass on the tax to their population.

Some may opt to similarly like the way it used to be. Then nothing is changed.

The states will have a strong incentive to make taxes as simple as possible. States, unlike federal governments, have to compete. If taxes are too complex, taxpayers will go to other states.

Some may think that land taxes are simpler. As long as the federal/central government get the same amount who cares?

Basically states that can figure out how to make tax simpler and cheaper and still attract taxpayers will collect “profits”. This profit incentive will keep states/provinces motivated to make tax less complicated and everything working.

With less complexity, states can attract more taxpayers like Amazons attracting buyers with its 1 click purchase feature. With more revenue and less spending, states can earn a profit that can be distributed as UBI.

Pay or Die is a bit like Might Makes Right

Pay or die and might makes right. Socialists hate the former and libertarians hate the latter.

Being a libertarian, I used to hate the latter too. However, both are actually quite fair to a certain extent. That is. Both motivate us to care about others and can properly align our interests to prosperity.

Why is someone poor? Because he’s not financially prudent and or his parents are not. So it’s natural that they die more quickly than the rich.

Why is he not financially prudent? Because he doesn’t understand or even care what his customers want. He doesn’t sell more stuffs. So he makes less money.

Just look at those people that took women study in college. Does he even care what the market needs? No. He or she just pick something stupid and suffer.

Hence, he is poorer, and when he’s sick, he’ll just die under capitalism.

Why is someone weak? Because he’s too selfish he doesn’t get allies. So his party (libertarian party) don’t get enough votes because they like, let people die.

You obviously can let some die. We need only 50% vote to win elections anyway. Most of which aren’t exactly swing voters. But libertarians seem to do it to the extreme without caring that they are so few.

Governments are not the main problem. If governments are gone there will be warlords. If warlords are gone, there will be other countries invading.

In fact, the reason why VOC can conquer the whole Indonesia is that Indonesians’ kingdoms were effectively libertarians. They get swallowed one by one with one not caring about the other.

For the same reason, Libertarian republic of Minerva was conquered by Tonga. The issue is not governments are evil. The issue is lack of allies. Even the socialists promise some share for people. The religious fundamentalists promise heavens. And the democracy promise sharing powers.

All ideologies that work can convincingly persuade a large number of people to help their cause by making better deals to those people.

Often they don’t do it right, and the promises don’t work. However, libertarians, don’t even try.

So they get attacked all the time. Right or wrong. It’s just the way life works.

Fortunately for most libertarians, there are ways to be powerful too.

That’s’ it. Compromised on certain principles get more allies. Instead of saying, we should have 0 welfare. Libertarians should say, we should turn all welfare into UBI. Steal money from lobbyist giving it to the people. That’s more palatable.

Competition among states will keep tax low anyway.

Vetted vs Open Border

I’ve been thinking about vetted vs open border. Some libertarians say vet. Another says open border.

I think both have problems.

With open border, like among states and provinces in a country, you will have traveling stupid voter problems. Voters in one region vote stupidly, make their state poor, travel to another state, and bring down their state.

Here, the word “stupid” means pick decisions that yield bad result from the point of view of normal voters.

Imagine if Syria or Venezuela is one of US states. The syrian vote for shariah and the venezuela vote for socialism. They both mess their country up. If they’re one of US states, they’ll just move to say Texas and turn it into a commie syariah state.

Is this stupid? Well, from the point of view of Texan, it is. I mean a commie syariah state will be poor like Venezuela and warring like Syria.

Those two conditions, warring and poor may not be a bad outcome from some points of view. Perhaps that’s what they want.

I’ve met voters that don’t care their country isn’t rich as long as it’s “syariah“. And if it’s warring they wanna die in war fighting for religion. So no. It may not be stupid from their point of view. We can’t even argue that this is “bad”

But we can agree that the Texans will think being poor and warring is stupid.

That’s traveling stupid voter problem. I wonder if some economist has figure this out and give a better name.

With the close border, we will have another problem.

Voting with your foot is much more effective than voting with ballots. That’s how we shop. We don’t even care how shops are governed.

Also, government vetting is too nosy and stupid. Bureaucrats and politicians often go the extra mile making things unnecessarily complex.

Many of those vetting will be done for unlibertarian purpose. For example, to provide jobs for overpriced Americans.

So either way sucks. It’s one of the samples why pure libertarianism is simply impossible.

I wonder if any economist ever recommends those coming in buying residency or citizenship from those coming out? That way we get the best of both world.

We get accountability because now voters that vote well will make their country rich and, even if they don’t like the direction, can still fetch higher value when they get out.

We also vote by foot and wallet which is the way it should be.

Are there alternatives? Yes. We can have open border but ditch democracy. They can come but must not do crime.

That’s also not practical. For people to obey NAP they need a strong organization to pretty much tell them to do it or else.

That organization need to be strong. For the organization to be strong, the most cost effective way is to make sure the organization is considered legitimate by large number of people and international community.

This is why anarcho capitalism, the way most people think, won’t work easily. Either governments show up or warlords showing up.

Democracy is the most proven method to resolve disputes that usually cost civil wars. Deviation from democracy, with high probability, will not make a state more libertarian.

Exception is Singapore and Dubai. However, neither is very libertarian socially. Dubai has religion to keep the peace (those islamic laws can work well if the state have a benevolent king). Singapore has many laws against political discourse. Counting on having a benevolent dictator is too risky.

A Story from My Friend why Capitalism is Fair

Let me tell you a bit about my experience. I was once interviewed for a possible graduate study at Caltech. That’s 20 years ago I think. I wasn’t accepted and I am happy I didn’t. But that’s a different story.

Anyway, I was interviewed. We were on a bus. There is this girl that everyone said will get in. I was confused. After the girl left, I ask, why everyone think she should get in? Her Math GRE was only 550. I can perfect Math GRE with the time halved. I don’t think I’ll get in.

They told me. Because she is a woman.

I was an asian male immigrant and that’s when I realized what it really takes to be successful in the academia world.

It doesn’t matter how smart you are or how hard you study. The test itself is ridiculously easy. How can a test see the best and brightest in US were that easy? But then again, perfect score wasn’t enough.

Someone out there think, “Let’s discriminate against asians, men, immigrants, whatever.” Poof. You’re gone.

You know what’s very surprising to me about America? It’s not the difference between American and Indonesia. No. It’s the similarity. We got racism against chinese in Indonesia. In US? Same thing. For the same reason.

Is it fair? I don’t know. I don’t know. I really don’t know.

I do know 2 things. I don’t like it. I don’t have to live with it.

One day, I made a program I scanned email from some sites, I marketed some digital camera. Boom. $1500 a week. Just like that. I could do this from Indonesia. I don’t even need a job.

Under free market, if I do it right, I will make it. NOBODY, not one government, can take that away from me easily.

My government can say, no, that’s wrong, it’s not fair because it’s not fair those with higher IQ have more success or those with the wrong skin color shouldn’t be succesful. I will just move to another country and do it again. Nobody.

Outside capitalism, everyone else decides how successful you can be.

If some crazy liberal that didn’t have enough common sense to pick stem major says we got to discriminate against asians, men, or whites, or black, or anything, that’s it, you’re fucked for something you can’t do anything about. Well, you can be a trans but c’mon? So fickle.

And that’s why, until today, I am very grateful of capitalism. Capitalism is fair to me. Took me a while to really make it, but I would pick capitalism any time.

I supposed I could also learn how to lick statist boots better. I guess I just don’t feel like it. Which one is saver? The left statists or the right ones? Should we apologize that we wet their guillotine after we stretch our head on to it?

Isn’t Capitalism Fair?

Why I think the world is great the way it really is right now? Because the top 10 richest people in the world are productive people that build businesses and not conquerors like Gengish Khan.

And the wealthiest are often also the most powerful. You can’t maintain and create wealth if you’re weak. Wealth is power. True wealth is power.

If you don’t like rules in your country, you can always leave.

However, the sun never set on Google’s empire. Nor on Microsoft’s, or Apple’s, or Xiaomi’s or Huawei, or Uber, or Amazon, or Bitcoin.

That’s capitalism. You can’t escape capitalism. You can. By why would you?

And one day, one of those empires, maybe one that you or I founded. Isn’t capitalism fair?