Do Libertarians have more fun?

Here's a fun commentary on Libertarians.

'I don't give a sh--, and I'm not paying for sh--.'

I have no willpower

I resisted as much as I could, but with everyone around me doing it...

...I bought WoW.

1 casualty

Pictures are up from our latest trip to Brianhead. It was a fantastic day. It was warm, sunny, and awesome snow. Most of us had a good time; unfortunately the skier of the group really messed up his leg attempting something crazy.

Here's a closer view of my snowboard.

The pictures may be down for a bit here and there. I may be moving them to a different server, but the above link should always work.

Social security rant

I haven't ranted on social security recently, and I know everyone is so interested in what I have to say about it...

The New York Times is useless in covering anything worthwhile on this subject.

On Social Security, 51 percent said permitting individuals to invest part of their Social Security taxes in private accounts, the centerpiece of Mr. Bush's plan, was a bad idea, even as a majority said they agreed with Mr. Bush that the program would become insolvent near the middle of the century if nothing was done. The number who thought private accounts were a bad idea jumped to 69 percent if respondents were told that the private accounts would result in a reduction in guaranteed benefits. And 45 percent said Mr. Bush's private account plan would actually weaken the economic underpinnings of the nation's retirement system.

Well golly, did the poll say anything about how current social security benefits are not guaranteed? Of course not. I trust the American market with my money more than I trust greedy politicians to make decisions with it.

Notwithstanding Mr. Bush's argument that citizens should be given more control over their retirement savings, almost four out of five respondents said it was the government's responsibility to assure a decent standard of living for the elderly.

I'd like to see where in our constitution this is stated. How about allowing people be responsible for themselves?

"I don't think he's listening to the people concerning Social Security," said Beverly Workman, a West Virginia Democrat who said she voted for Mr. Bush. "I think the public wants him to leave it alone."

Jim Choi, 34, an unemployed biotechnology worker from California, said: "The way the system is set up, it's not going to go bankrupt. People will get by; we all adapt."

George Bush should listen to the public, cause obviously the public is an expert on all economic issues. Screw all those fancy schmancy economists who are arguing about this, most of whom agree that the system is going to go bankrupt. But nevermind that, people will get by.

I wonder if anyone that opposes George Bush's plan even knows what it involves. The plan is such a small tweak, and get this, completely optional. The plan is not shutting down social security completely and leaving people with their money blind to any sort of investments they should pursue. I would think that any rational person who fears privatization would agree to go ahead and give this plan a whirl. If it works, great! Then the percent of payroll taxes allowed to be relocated to private accounts can be raised higher than the piddly 4% it will start at. If it is not working, then it can be canceled, or changed again.

The most important thing is that something be done. What is done doesn't necessarily have to be 100% correct. Just get across the idea that we can actually start fixing the faulty system. I don't really like Bush's plan all that much, because I don't think its enough, but its better than doing nothing at all.