Nathan's Blog

Religious Freedom

Nathan Rice — Wed, 18 Aug 2010 02:48:49 +0000

The right to the free exercise of religion and political speech never guaranteed that such exercise will be found in good taste.

Jayvie Canono via Twitter

The Problem with Safety Nets

Nathan Rice — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:41:57 +0000

One of my biggest issues with federal spending on so-called “safety net” programs is that more often than not, the safety net becomes a security blanket.

Scare Us, then Lead Us to Safety

Nathan Rice — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 19:48:41 +0000

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

— H. L. Mencken

Profit Is NOT Evil

Nathan Rice — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:54:29 +0000

Profit potential incentivizes innovation. Restrict profit, or demonize it, and you inhibit progress.

It’s War

Nathan Rice — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 04:59:24 +0000

On the battlefield of ideas, Barack Obama has lost. Not because his ideas don’t resonate with some people — they do — but because his ambition and overconfidence stirred the sleeping hornets.

If you want to win a war, you must do one of two things:

1. Fight swiftly and efficiently and win before your opponent can fight back.
2. Fight slowly and quietly and have more patience and stamina than your opponent.

Obama evidently could do neither, and his party will suffer greatly for it.

Liberty Trumps Prosperity

Nathan Rice — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 05:20:11 +0000

Liberty trumps Prosperity. Luckily for us, Liberty also leads to Prosperity.

Greedy Public Servants

Nathan Rice — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 00:57:40 +0000

I find it a bit strange that, in order to convince politicians in Washington D.C. to lower taxes, we have to assure them that doing so will increase net Federal tax revenue.

For once, I would like for someone to stand up and say, “I want to drastically lower income taxes. It will result in a net loss of Federal tax revenue, and the politicians will just have to operate the government with less money. Deal with it.”

The Rights and Responsibilities of the Federal Government

Nathan Rice — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 04:24:58 +0000

No right or responsibility of the Federal Government should be assumed. If it exists, it will be explicitly granted in the Constitution. Any man who believes otherwise either does not know his history, or deceptively rewrites it.

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.
– James Madison

On Healthcare

Nathan Rice — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 02:33:05 +0000

I’m generally not one to attempt to comment specifically about current events, but I feel dragged into this by the bombardment of chatter on the issue, from every direction.

While it’s absolutely true that a single-payer healthcare system in America would prove disastrous (while certainly being praised in its failure from everyone in favor of it), it can in no way be claimed that our current system is anything less than a disaster itself. The only real benefit the current system has in its favor is that it is run (mostly) by the private sector.

But the illogical nature of full coverage in healthcare makes it wasteful and unsustainable. Insurance is supposed to protect us from the unlikely, not the inevitable. Full coverage discourages the use of bargain hunting, a keystone of capitalism. In a system where there is no bargain shopping, there will be no competition. Prices will go up in perpetuity, which is precisely what we are trying to avoid in a single-payer system.

Sure, the federal government shouldn’t be involved in your healthcare, but we’ll still have rising healthcare costs. If you want to fix that, I suggest getting a high deductible “emergency” policy, and a Health Savings Account, then call around and find the cheapest doctor in town. Hunt for bargains, ask what things cost, and spend wisely — because it’s your money on the line now.

Small Government, Big Moral Police?

Nathan Rice — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:14:46 +0000

No true “small-government conservative” can oppose same-sex marriage in policy. For if a government can dictate who can and cannot wed, then it can no longer be considered small.