College Libertarians

Interesting news from Reuters

“Cash-strapped Bulgaria and Romania hoped taxing cigarettes would be an easy way to raise money but the hikes are driving smokers to a growing black market instead.

Criminal gangs and impoverished Roma communities near borders with countries where prices are lower — Serbia, Macedonia, Moldova and Ukraine — have taken to smuggling which has wiped out gains from higher excise duties.

Bulgaria increased taxes by nearly half this year and stepped up customs controls and police checks at shops and markets. Customs office data, however, shows tax revenues from cigarette sales so far in 2010 have fallen by nearly a third.”

Perhaps the North Carolinians who took the July poll mentioned here should rethink their positions.

Thanks to Division of Labour for the link

Last night, the Chapel Hill / Carrboro chapter of the NAACP hosted a forum for all the U.S. Senate candidates for Richard Burr’s NC seat. From the College Libertarians, I, Steve Kwon and David Deerson were in attendance. It was my first time seeing Burr’s opposition (though, quite tellingly, not Burr himself) and they each gave very different and interesting impressions. Here are my views (Steve’s and David’s may differ) on the candidates.

Michael Beitler: The only Libertarian candidate, and probably my favorite in regards to policy. Unlike the other candidates who opened with the Cliff’s Notes versions of their life stories, Beitler introduced himself simply by giving his name, stating his party and highlighting his “fiscally conservative, socially liberal” policy stance. I was most impressed when he was the only candidate to fully commit to a reversal of American imperialist foreign policy and setting a firm time table for troop withdrawals. In addition to being the only Libertarian, Beitler was also the only non-lawyer. With something like 50% of Congress being composed of lawyers, I’m always happy to see a candidate who brings some diversity to the arena. Beitler is definitely not a career politician like the rest, though this may actually hurt his campaign as he hasn’t built up the same polished rhetoric as the other candidates. As a fellow businessman, I understand and appreciate the brevity–but will voters be as impressed? Whether or not Beitler can sway on-the-fence independents remains to be seen.

Cal Cunningham: This guy gives me a John Edwards vibe. And I don’t mean “champion of the people” John Edwards–I mean “scumbag politician with the charm of a used car salesman” John Edwards. I try to give my fellow Tar Heels the benefit of the doubt, but this man oozes with political ambition. I wouldn’t trust him further than I can throw him. He didn’t seem to offer much in the way of sound or sensible policy; but if you like hearing stories about underdogs and war vets and photo ops, he’s your man.

Ken Lewis: I can’t really remember anything important Lewis said (aside from completely misinterpreting Citizens United), but I remember clearly that he said it for longer than any other candidate. He went over his time by a minute for nearly every question. There was no time for the final question round, and I blame Ken Lewis for that. While I was disappointed when Dr. Beitler didn’t say enough, I was far more aggravated when Mr. Lewis said too much. Please learn to shut up.

Larry Linney: Arguably the most entertaining candidate. A Republican, and probably not a popular one since he’s running against a Republican incumbent, Linney was 60% sound policy, 10% pure humor, and 30% totally insane. His economic ideas were similar to Beitler’s, and he delivered them with more polish. His views on immigration and Guantanamo, however, were horrifying. He also seems to be an Alex Jones conspiracy nut. He won’t get my vote, but I’m happy he was a part of the show. My favorite moment was when he insisted that fossil fuels are completely renewable if we just give it enough time.

Elaine Marshall: She showed up half-way through the panel, and probably didn’t smile once. I saw on Twitter that she’s the front-runner in the Democratic primary. Very disappointing. She didn’t seem to have anything substantive to say about policy–or at least I can’t recall anything of merit. She’s a career politician type, just like Cunningham. I get the “I’m an evil robot from Mars disguised as a human woman” vibe from her. In that respect, she reminds me of Hillary Clinton.

Marcus Williams: Probably the most stylish candidate, with a hip suit, shaved head and full beard. (I guess you just had to be there.) Nothing struct me about his policies, judging by the fact that I didn’t tweet about anything he said. Just another Democrat. I think if Samuel Jackson puts on some weight and stops shaving, he could look like Mr. Williams.

College Libertarians members Tom VanAntwerp (left), Donnie Hill (right) and Steve Kwon (cameraman) took a moment to celebrate their liberty on a cruise to Grand Turk. Fighting for freedom means nothing without the chance to enjoy it!

Here is this week’s round-up of what our members are saying in the press:

On March 16th, Tom VanAntwerp published a column in The Daily Tar Heel about the importance of prices and how wasteful we would be without them.

On March 17th, Steve Kwon wrote an editorial demanding an end to corporal punishment in NC schools.

On March 18th, Kevin Munger pointed out in a letter to the editor how the word “sustainable” has become an almost meaningless leftist buzzword.

In response to this particularly horrible column by a couple of SDS members in the Daily Tar Heel yesterday, UNC-CH College Libertarians member Will Harris wrote this letter to the editor:

I appreciate Sarah Baker’s and Ana Maria Reichenbach’s support for accessible higher education for the poor and for undocumented aliens, but their demands are based in the ideology of entitlement rather than in sound economics or finance.

College tuition has been increasing much more rapidly than inflation since the early 1980s. Part of the reason for progressively higher rates is government aid. As available government aid has continually increased, so have tuition rates. It’s counter-intuitive, I’ll admit, and I’m not saying there should be no financial aid, but there is evidence to this effect: A Cato Institute study looking at 16 years of data found a correlation between rising aid and rising tuition of 0.97—nearly a perfect correlation.

In economics, when demand increases faster than supply, prices rise. When much of student expenses are government subsidized, more students will want to attend college. As demand rises more quickly than the number of professors and class room seats, so too does the tuition rate rise.

Baker’s and Reichenbach’s recommendations do nothing to address this major problem. Rather, they favor robbing the private sector. This is an impulsive suggestion that reveals their poor grasp of economics. With the economy in tatters and unemployment as high as it is, it makes no sense to attack RTP. Singling out and increasing the taxes for that vital sector of the North Carolina economy would not lower college costs. It would merely cause economic hardship for the companies and their employees by increasing their overhead. This could ultimately drive high-tech jobs out of North Carolina.

The cost of college is a serious issue facing millions of Americans, and it deserves equally serious contemplation. I do not believe throwing tantrums and advocating the plunder of legitimate business is a worthy solution. Please grow up. You’re making college students look like spoiled brats.

William McLeon Harris
Junior
History, Political Science

I submitted the following letter to the Daily Tar Heel yesterday, in response to a nearly incoherent editorial by Reed Watson. His article honestly reminded me of the sort of gibberish an Ayn Rand villain might say. Unsurprisingly, my response was unpublished. Partly my own fault, as I feel I was overly vitriolic.

Reed Watson’s recent love letter to our latest Peace Prize Laureate (“You can do good too, without Nobel,” Oct. 12) left me feeling all kinds of queasy. By his arguments, we should be happy that Obama won the Nobel because his life is really, really hard. I mean, just imagine it! All anyone expects from *you* is to work obediently at a dreadful desk job for the rest of your life. But not Obama! He gets up every morning with the whole world expecting him to fix their problems for them. And even if he does, there will always be some clearly unpatriotic hooligan who hates him. What an enormous burden on our Dear Leader’s shoulders—somebody give that man a prize to cheer him up!

So never mind that Obama hasn’t fixed global warming yet. And don’t worry about continuing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, or Obama’s request for renewal of surveillance provisions in the PATRIOT Act. Oh, and just forget about bailouts to the politically connected while unemployment continued to rise. That stuff doesn’t matter—his intentions are good, so give him the Prize!

The fact of the matter is that no one man—especially a politician—will solve our problems for us. Obama is not Superman, and neither he nor anyone else should be treated that way. There are no magic policy solutions for every challenge our world faces. It’s up to each of us to make our world a better place. The truly great people aren’t the ones with Nobel Prizes, but the ones who forsake fame, fortune and power to pursue their dreams for a better world. Those men and women are the real heroes of our age, and there’s no reason you can’t be one of them.

There was another pretty awful editorial today from the usually awful Study Abroad Columnist, Tim Freer. I plan to respond to that one later today.

Update: Another member, Will Harris, also submitted this letter in response to the same editorial:

The editorial “You can do good, without Nobel” is abhorrent. In essence, it praises demagogues and megalomaniacs and consoles us in our averageness for not achieving their greatness.

Mr. Watson’s “illustrious” Nobel laureates are all powerful men. They do not go to bed at night unhappy. Rulers go to bed giddy with insatiate greed and lust for power. Stop treating them like saints or martyrs. No one forced them to seize the reigns of the state.

Barack Obama has neither the authority nor the ability to enact the miracles Mr. Watson asks of him. Further, surrendering to the government the power necessary to make the attempt would subject us to oppression, strife, and violence. That is the nature of government.

Are we so impotent that we should pray as though to pagan gods, slaughtering lambs on an altar before the White House whilst supplicating before Barack Obama in the hope that our Omnipotent State will deliver us from the tribulations of existence? No, we will save the world ourselves.

Let us not forget what government really is: a gang of avaricious lawyers and bureaucrats who turn to politics because their only marketable skill is controlling people.

While obsequiously praising rulers, Mr. Watson has insulted us. We are not “average” simply because we have no aspirations to fame and power. The peaceful cooperative efforts of free people–not the strong arm of the state–embody the dignity and majesty of humanity. Let us praise ourselves and not these demagogues.

Thanks to everyone who came to the meeting Wednesday! We had a really good turnout, and I hope we can keep it up. Here’s the recap for those who couldn’t make it.

-We discussed future events we wanted to hold, including a screening of The Power of the Poor with economist Hernando de Soto, inviting BJ Lawson to speak on healthcare and trying to invite John Stossel as a big-name speaker.

-We nominated candidates for office. Candidates are as follows:
Kevin Munger–Treasurer
Ben Beidler–advisor on code and UNC policy
Stephanie Davis– advisor on code and UNC policy
Alex Lopez– Outreach (speech) coordinator, events coordinator
David Deerson — PR coordinator
Tom VanAntwerp — IT coordinator, co-chair

We will be voting and confirming at our next meeting on October 14.

-We are going to screen The Power of the Poor this coming Wednesday, October 7, for all College Libertarians. This is a great new documentary (has not even aired yet!) and all are highly encouraged to attend.

I also met with our adviser, Georg Vanberg, today. He is going to help us arrange co-sponsorship for The Power of the Poor screening with the Global Education Center and Kenan-Flagler Business School. He also had some good ideas for events which I’ll share at the next meeting.

I look forward to seeing everyone at our private screening next week. BYOP (bring your own popcorn).

P.S., For those who have RSVPed to events but are not attending, we would love to know if you are having schedule conflicts that we might be able to work around. We don’t want to leave anyone out if we can help it. Get in touch through email or on facebook and let us know how we can help you to be more involved.

Thanks to everyone who came to our latest College Libertarian meeting! We apologize for sending out our notification email on such short notice, and we promise to be more prompt from now on.
For those of you who missed it, here is a brief recap of the evening’s discussion:

Next week is Students’ Rights Week! Our screening of Indoctrinate U will be on Friday, September 25th. (Room and time TBD, but we’ll let you know by tomorrow.) We will be doing Pit sits and handing out pocket Constitutions on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday to promote the event. If you want to hang out with some of the other great guys and gals of the College Libertarians, coming to the Pit sits is a great way to do it. To volunteer, just tell us when you are free next week at this site: http://www.doodle.com/98mqihknw5y2m5rp Don’t worry if someone else has already signed up for a time when you are free—the more the merrier! And bring your cameras, too—we need lots of pictures of us at work to promote the group.

Also, since it’s hard to get to know your fellow libertarians at bi-weekly meetings, we will soon be starting optional social meetings on our off weeks. We will be meeting at restaurants on Franklin St to eat, chat and just have some fun. Though optional, we hope to see lots of people join us!

We began planning some ideas for speakers and other events for the semester, and made some lists of our ideas. For everyone who couldn’t attend, feel free to share any other ideas you have with the rest of us. Here are our present thoughts:

Speakers we can almost certainly book:
-BJ Lawson, former candidate for Congress, doctor and entrepreneur
-Mike Munger, chair of Poli Sci at Duke, former Libertarian candidate for NC governor and Kevin’s dad
-Bruce Caldwell, biographer of F. A. Hayek and professor at Duke
-Georg Vanberg, professor of Poli Sci at UNC, UNC-CH CL club advisor

Speakers we want, but we aren’t holding our breath:
-John Stossel, libertarian journalist
-Drew Carey, actor/comedian, libertarian, producer of the Drew Carey Project on Reason.tv
-Vince Vaughn, actor/comedian, libertarian
-Penn Jillette, actor/magician, libertarian, co-host of Penn and Teller: Bullshit! on Showtime
-Ron Paul, former presidential candidate
-John Allison, former CEO of BB&T, fan of Ayn Rand

Other events:
-Screening of The Fountainhead film
-Screening of a documentary based on the work of economist Hernando de Soto

Some other speakers in the libertarian movement are also interested in meeting with the club members personally to talk to us. We have a lot of exciting opportunities, so be sure to come out and help us realize them.