Liberal Vision

Worst decade ever?

Reason.com thinks so. Or at least since the ’90s.

Warning: very American.

Happy 2010, from everyone at Liberal Vision.

Why Health Care Shouldn’t be a “Right”

A very good report from Jacob Mchangama on why health care should NOT be considered a “right”:

The idea that governments should be legally obliged to provide healthcare for their citizens has become mainstream. The “right to health” forms the basis of policy for the UN, many international NGOs and development agencies, and exists in the constitutions of many countries.

‘If the development community is serious about human rights and improving health, they would switch their focus away from the “right” to health and toward the fundamental rights currently denied to hundreds of millions of people in poorer parts of the world,’

There is no evidence that “the right to health” has actually improved healthcare anywhere in the world – in some cases it has undermined it by imposing huge burdens on already over-stretched judicial systems.

The “right to health” also serves as a convenient way for authoritarian governments to deflect attention from violations of the most basic civil and political rights.

In reality, the rights which are really fundamental to improved healthcare are those which underpin prosperity and economic development – such as the right to own and exchange property and the right to free speech. Such rights are denied to millions, yet are vital for creating the prosperity needed to pay for good healthcare, Mchangama concludes.

Makes for a very interesting read.

Should We Execute Kate Moss?!

I thought the day would never come.. but here we are. The Daily Mail is commending a socialist regime:

Yet for all this orchestrated wailing, is it not possible that China is right to put Shaikh to death?

No, no it isn’t…

Indeed, I would argue that Britain’s enfeebled, self-destructive approach to narcotics has been graphically highlighted by China’s ruthlessness in tackling drug pushers.

In contrast to New Labour’s policy of appeasement and surrender, the Chinese Government acts vigorously to defend its people from the misery caused by the drugs trade.

My regret is not over tough action by Beijing, but the fact that we in this country do not possess the moral clarity or strength of purpose to deal ruthlessly with drug peddlers and other enemies of our society.

I beg your pardon? A policy of appeasement and surrender is exactly what we don’t have. We have prohibition. A factor that augments the misery caused by drugs by not acknowledging the fact that people take drugs because they want too. Britain’s current policies on drugs create and empower “the enemies of society” in the same way Al Capone was created and empowered by prohibition in the 1920s.

Vacuous supermodel Kate Moss was caught using cocaine by undercover reporters, most of the fashion world rallied behind her with a sense of moral indignation, protecting her lucrative contracts and behaving as though she were a victim.

British officialdom now adopts a simpering indulgence towards drug abuse. Politicians line up to boast how much cannabis they smoked in their youth and downgrade the criminal classification of substances.

Who Would Have Thought?!

Lib Dem Voice is currently counting down the most read Opinion pieces of 2009…

and the seventh most popular piece this year was MINE! I don’t usually like to brag about these things but since you asked ; -)

Oh Dear…

I don’t quite know what to make of this:

“You may follow Compass as well by clicking on the “follow” button on their profile. <<– I’d rather not…

“What Would Ayn Say…” No.1

Just spotted this book on Amazon.co.uk:

I imagine Ayn would be torn. On on hand it’s the entrepreneurial spirit at it’s best. On the other we should all strive to attain gold plated sex toys to call our own! Either way the reviews are well worth a read…

Time to Park Taxi Regulation

From an excellent article in yesterday’s Times. Phillip Stevens explains how unnecessary regulation may be adding extortionate amounts to your fare home:

There are two fundamental reasons why the taxi market isn’t working.

In the mid-19th century, laws were passed to limit town centre congestion by horses and carriages. Many local authorities still use these laws to restrict the number of licences granted to taxis, which results in fewer taxis on the road than are needed — explaining the long queues at taxi ranks in certain towns on a Saturday night.

Second, the fear of unscrupulous drivers extorting hapless passengers has resulted in highly regulated fares. Instead of relying on competition, as is the case for most other services, local authorities set fares with the taxi industry. The needs of the travelling public are secondary in these opaque discussions.

With too few “rank and hail” taxis on the road, all of which charge too much, what can be done? We need a free market in taxis, in which any individual or company can offer a service, providing they can show the driver is safe and the vehicle roadworthy. The distinction between “rank and hail” and phone-only minicabs should also be abolished.

The article is well worth a read. Great stuff from the people at IPN.

Worst Propaganda Ever…

One of the reasons I am grateful to be a Liberal is that we’re not completely moonbat when it comes to Europe. Although I may have discovered the reason many are. Truly shocking as a propaganda attempt:

Why LibDems are Wrong to Support the Illiberal Hunting Ban

Another Christmas has come and gone. Amidst the hangover of wrapping paper and hearty leftovers there is an issue that pops its head above the parapet every year and is likely to make an ugly come back if the Tories win the next General with a comfortable majority.

As with anything with “ban” in the title the Hunting Ban, instated under the guise of “animal welfare”, has had completely opposite consequences and unfortunately this is the policy of the Liberal Democrats.*

A burgeoning fox population is being dealt with using poisons that adversely affect the surrounding environment, the same environments that are used to farm the food that we eat and in which animal lovers indulge in country pursuits. Indiscriminate trapping methods and the abandonment of traditional practices adversely affect other species, some of which are endangered like the Dormouse,  proving that anti-hunt zealots do not give a toss about ‘animal welfare’.

The inappropriate residual of class war still taints this policy. The notion that everyone living in the countryside is rich is still prevalent and this is where we should be making noise. Rural poverty is a woefully under reported issue and one where the LibDems could make electoral gains in the countryside if we tackled this issue appropriately and sensitively. Much of the hunting ban is stems from the New Labour metropolitan elite illiberally imposing it’s values upon the countryside making the Tories look comparatively compassionate. I can’t commend MPs Lembit Opik and Roger Williams enough for their stance on this issue.

* UPDATE: I previously stated, incorrectly, that LibDem policy was to support the Hunting Ban as has been pointed out by Paul Walter, this is not the case. In light of this, we should make it LibDem policy to oppose the ban instead of sitting on the fence.

** UPDATE 2: I regard hunting with hounds not as a stand alone animal welfare issue. It is actually a negative liberty issue.

It is not illegal for me to take my gun and purposely shoot a fox on my land. Despite the risk that I may miss the vital organs and cause suffering to the animal before I kill it.

If it is not illegal for me to purposely kill a fox then this is a negative liberty issue up until the point where experts decide I am treating the animal cruelly. As has been the case in poison, gassing, self-tightening snares or spring & teeth traps.

I currently disagree with the premise that hunting a fox with hounds is less cruel than shooting it or catching it with a snare and then killing it. Until evidence objectively shows that fox hunting is crueller than the aforementioned I will consider the hunting ban to be illiberal.

Queen’s Speech: the Libertarian Draft

What a lot of people don’t know is Her Majesty the Queen of England, is in fact a rampant libertarian. Every year Elizabeth II writes a secret libertarian draft of her speech which is quickly dismissed by courtiers. Well, this year Liberal Vision has obtained a copy of that draft and is proud to publish it here:

Merry Christmas,

What we really, really want for Christmas is the real proletariat revolution, libertarianism.

Many would not think myself or my family to be, in any way, libertarian, yet my darling Phillip has been doing his bit for freedom of speech for quite some time now.

Some may say that inheriting a monarchy and being a Libertarian are mutually exclusive. Yet our system, with a ceremonial head of state and an elected premier is less expensive to the taxpayer than the elected head of the executive also carrying out ceremonial duties. So it’s all good, bruv.

For those of you who question the appropriateness of an unelected leader in this day and age, I ask you this: “where exactly have you been since June 2007?”

I’m not too upset with Gordon, to be honest with you. He has a good heart but he is more than a little dull and clearly incompetent. Which is an easy combination to endure when you know it’ll be over soon. I must admit I am more partial to the lovely Sarah than that dreadful Cherie woman… It is important to remember that we are a nation at war. So don’t forget that they’re actually my armies, Gordo. Treat them with respect.

So I wish you a Merry Christmas and for most of you merry will mean your grandparents being high as a kite from having mixed their morphine based arthritis medicine with Tesco Value Lumbrusco or just plain drunk. But whilst you loll about in self-induced food and liquor coma, which as a Libertarian I’m all for, in everything you do and whatever path you choose, think of ways you can make this country more free.

In 2010 I wish you all a happy life, liberty and an elected premier.

Happy New Year.