2012 YAL National Convention Video

On July 26, 2012, in Home, by admin

This video opened Young Americans for Liberty’s 2012 National Convention July 25, 2012. A survey of the progress being made by liberty youth and the Ron Paul movement.

Tagged with:
 

What is LearnLiberty?

On July 24, 2012, in Home, by admin

LearnLiberty is a resource for learning about the ideas of a free society. Our goal is to provide a starting point for conversations on important questions:

• What is the nature of man and society?
• What are the best ways to organize human society?
• What is the proper role for government?

For more videos please visit http://www.learnliberty.org

“Like” us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/learnliberty

Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/learnliberty

And please subscribe to our YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=LearnLiberty

Sign Codes vs. Free Speech

On July 3, 2012, in Home, by admin

Across the country, government is dealing a one-two punch to property rights and free speech. Using sign codes, cities are demanding large signs protesting eminent domain abuse be taken down. Free speech rights are essential to protect our other rights, including our property rights. If victims of eminent domain abuse can’t speak out against it, who can? IJ is working to defend individuals’ property rights and free speech rights when they come under attack.

Tagged with:
 

http://www.ij.org/vacon
Ordinarily, if you want to start a new business or offer a new service there is a simple test to find out whether your new business is needed: You open the doors and tell the world. If people need your business, you will have customers. If they don’t, you won’t. That experience—of learning what people need and how new types of services can fit in—is familiar to anyone who has ever been an entrepreneur. Indeed, it is familiar to anyone who has ever been a customer.

It is also an experience that the state of Virginia turns entirely on its head for people who want to offer new healthcare services. If you want to offer new healthcare services, even something as routine as opening a private clinic, you have to obtain special permission from the state government. And permission is not easy to come by: Would-be service providers have to persuade state officials that their new service is “necessary”—and they have to do so in a process that verges on full-blown litigation in which existing businesses (their would-be competitors) are allowed to oppose them. Not surprisingly, this process can be incredibly expensive, and it frequently results in new services being forbidden to operate at all.

To be clear, this requirement (called a certificate-of-need or CON program) has nothing to do with public health or safety. Separate state and federal laws govern who is allowed to practice medicine and what kind of medical procedures are or are not permitted. Virginia’s CON program only regulates whether someone is allowed to open a new office or purchase new equipment; it is explicitly designed to make sure new services are not allowed to take customers away from established healthcare services.

In short, Virginia’s CON program is nothing but a government permission slip to compete. It ensures that more money flows into the pockets of established, politically connected businesses, and it accomplishes this by trampling entrepreneurs’ economic liberty and reducing Virginians’ choices for medical care.

But patients and doctors—not state officials—are in the best position to decide what healthcare services are needed. That is why Colon Health Centers of America, headed by Dr. Mark Baumel, MD, and Washington Imaging Associates Maryland, LLC, headed by Dr. Mark Monteferrante, MD, have joined forces with the Institute for Justice to challenge Virginia’s protectionist CON program. The Constitution protects individuals’ right to earn an honest living free from unreasonable government interference, and it prevents states from putting up unnecessary barriers to interstate commerce. The Virginia CON program does both, and that is why the federal courts should strike it down.

Tagged with:
 

Accusations of hate speech can be an effective politically correct pretense to either stifle free speech or to defend the undependable. Geert Wilders

Keep up with liberty issues and news at http://www.LibertyPen.com

Tagged with:
 

http://www.ij.org/paleospeech

Can the government throw you in jail for offering advice on the Internet about what food people should buy at the grocery store?

That is exactly the claim made by the North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition. In December 2011, diabetic blogger Steve Cooksey started a Dear Abby-style advice column on his popular blog (www.diabetes-warrior.net) to answer reader questions. One month later, the State Board informed Steve that he could not give readers advice on diet, whether for free or for compensation, because doing so constituted the unlicensed, and thus criminal, practice of dietetics. The State Board also told Steve that his private emails and telephone calls with readers and friends were illegal, as was his paid life-coaching service. The State Board went through Steve’s writings with a red pen, indicating what he may and may not say without a government-issued license.

But the First Amendment does not allow the government to ban people from sharing ordinary advice about diet, or scrub the Internet—from blogs to Facebook to Twitter—of speech the government does not like. North Carolina can no more force Steve to become a licensed dietitian than it could require Dear Abby to become a licensed psychologist.

That is why on May 30, 2012, Steve Cooksey joined the Institute for Justice in filing a major free speech lawsuit against the State Board in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division. This lawsuit seeks to answer one of the most important unresolved questions in First Amendment law: When does the government’s power to license occupations trump free speech?

Tagged with:
 

What do you think the role of government should be? Are you in favor of anarchy or minarchy? Do you believe there are public goods like defense that the government should provide, or should there be no state at all? Should the government provide a minimal welfare state, or even control the entire economy? What conclusions have you come to?

Tagged with:
 

Do we even need a government? Some anarchist philosophers and economists don’t think so. Dr. Nigel Ashford takes a look at two anarcho-capitalist thinkers, Murray Rothbard and David Friedman. Rothbard criticizes the state for its use of coercion, and Friedman criticizes it for its inefficiency. Both argue that there are free-market alternatives to all government services.

Tagged with:
 

Do all people have natural rights? Philosophers Ayn Rand and Robert Nozick think so. Dr. Nigel Ashford examines the “natural rights” school of thought, in particular the theories of Rand and Nozick. Nozick and Rand both argue that government should never infringe upon our natural rights, and that government exists only to protect these natural rights. They also find that capitalism is the only moral economic system because it is based on voluntary exchange, not coercion.

Tagged with:
 

What is the “Austrian School” of economics? When people refer to the Austrians, they are usually referring to the ideas of Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises. In this video, Professor Nigel Ashford outlines the basic beliefs of these two prominent economists. While the two agree that government should be limited, they also disagree on many points.

Tagged with:
 

Government grows and grows. Why? Is there any way to limit government? Dr. Ashford explores the intellectual school known as “public choice.” Public choice theorists believe that politicians are self-interested, meaning they have a vested interest in growing government beyond its proper, limited size. This means that small, concentrated groups (like industry lobbying associations) yield tremendous power over the politics. This leads to subsidies and tax breaks for politically favored industries.

Tagged with:
 

How should we assess the merits of a law or government program? According to Milton Friedman and the members of the “Chicago School,” we need to look at empirical evidence and see the consequences of laws. Many laws are well-intended, but do they actually have good outcomes? The Chicago School admits that markets do fail sometimes fails. But, they contend that government also fails, and that usually government failure is far greater than market failure. Dr. Ashford takes a close look at the Chicago school.

Tagged with:
 

What is “classical liberalism?” Is it a specific set of beliefs, a philosophy, an economic theory, or something else? In this series, Dr. Nigel Ashford explores what classical liberalism — sometimes called “libertarianism” — actually means. Dr. Ashford looks at 5 different schools of classical liberalism/ libertarianism, and examines how they are similar and how they are different. Dr. Ashford hopes that as you explore this series, you will think deeply about your own beliefs and political philosophy, and draw your own conclusions.

Tagged with:
 

What the heck is going on in the Republican Party these days? Tonight: What DO the Republicans stand for?

Originally aired 2/09/12 on “Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano” on Fox Business Network

http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/freedom-watch/index.html
http://www.judgenap.com/
http://www.twitter.com/judgenap
http://www.facebook.com/JudgeNapolitano

NOTE: This video may be reproduced for non-profit, educational purposes ONLY.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This video may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

DISCLAIMER: This channel is in no way affilliated with Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox Business Network, Newscorp or any of its subsidiaries or employees. The contents of this channel reflect the views of its owner, only. Videos made by various authors of various topics should not be construed to represent the views of the other authors also uploaded on this channel. Each video is representive of its creators only.

Tagged with:
 

Court Rejects Challenge to Indiana Choice Scholarship Program

Release: http://www.ij.org/schoolchoice/4258

Tagged with:
 

http://www.ij.org/Verlin

Verlin Stoll is a 27-year-old entrepreneurial dynamo who owns Crescent Tide funeral home in Saint Paul, Minn. Verlin has built a successful business because he offers low-cost funerals while providing high-quality service. His business is also one of the only funeral homes that benefits low-income families who cannot afford the high prices of the big funeral-home companies.

Verlin wants to expand his business, hire new employees and continue to offer the lowest prices in the Twin Cities, but Minnesota refuses to let Verlin build a second funeral home unless he builds a $30,000 embalming room that he will never use.

Minnesota’s law is irrational. Embalming is never required just because someone passes away and the state does not even require funeral homes to do their own embalming. In fact, it is perfectly legal to outsource embalming to a third-party embalmer. Minnesota’s largest funeral chain has 17 locations with 17 embalming rooms, but actually uses only one of those rooms.

Why is Minnesota forcing Verlin to waste $30,000 on a useless embalming room as a condition of expanding his thriving business?

So that the big, full-amenity funeral-home businesses can benefit from a law that drives up prices for consumers and operating expenses for competitors such as Verlin. Verlin’s basic services fee is only $250, which is about 90 percent lower than the $2,500 that the average Twin Cities’ funeral home charges. Verlin’s business model is built on minimizing fixed costs, which is why he does not have a hearse or chapel, and this law—to the advantage of his competitors—stands in the way of him expanding his low-cost, high-quality approach.

The government should not force Minnesotans to do useless things. That is why on January 19, 2012, Verlin and the Institute for Justice challenged the law in state court.

The Minnesota Constitution protects every Minnesotan’s economic liberty, which means that it protects entrepreneurs from being burdened by legal requirements that are either useless or designed to suppress honest competition.

A victory here will not only free Verlin from an unconstitutional restraint on his economic liberty, but protect entrepreneurs across the state from pointless laws and bureaucracy.

Tagged with:
 

A Case For Blocking The North American Union

On January 16, 2012, in Home, by admin

“A Case for Blocking the North American Union” offers an updated, no-nonsense report on the dangers of illegal immigration and the proposed NAU. (2008, 11 min, DVD)

buy the DVD here:
https://www.jbs.org/shop/a-case-for-blocking-the-nau

NOTE: This video may be reproduced for non-profit, educational purposes ONLY.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This video may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

DISCLAIMER: This channel is in no way affilliated with Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox Business Network, Newscorp or any of its subsidiaries or employees. The contents of this channel reflect the views of its owner, only. Videos made by various authors of various topics should not be construed to represent the views of the other authors also uploaded on this channel. Each video is representive of its creators only.

Tagged with:
 

Is the government capable of reducing its own spending? Or will it only do so when it is forced to do so? Tonight: The case for Austerity.

Originally aired 12/09/11 on “Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano” on Fox Business Network

http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/freedom-watch/index.html
http://www.judgenap.com/
http://www.twitter.com/judgenap
http://www.facebook.com/JudgeNapolitano

NOTE: This video may be reproduced for non-profit, educational purposes ONLY.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This video may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

DISCLAIMER: This channel is in no way affilliated with Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox Business Network, Newscorp or any of its subsidiaries or employees. The contents of this channel reflect the views of its owner, only. Videos made by various authors of various topics should not be construed to represent the views of the other authors also uploaded on this channel. Each video is representive of its creators only.

Tagged with:
 
Stop SOPA