Nice going, Twitwits: All your Tweets are belong to us.
Category: Big Mother (page 2 of 15)
Teri Lussier pointed this out to me last week, and I’ve been waiting since then for someone to plumb the implications. Ah, well, when there’s constabulary work to be done…
Here’s the news: The state of California is making ZipRealty pay it agents minimum wage for their time.
That’s huge. It’s just the thin edge of the wedge, for now, but the implication is that the real estate broker’s “safe harbor” exclusion from employment laws is about to be flushed into the Pacific Ocean.
This is why brokers pile on as many hopeless, helpless, hapless idiots as they can: Virtually everyone has at least one transaction in him, and the cost to the broker for the eventual failure of 85%+ of the new “hires” is nothing.
I don’t want to seem to praise employment laws, since their sole effect is to destroy jobs. But no other business would — or even could — be as wasteful of human capital as virtually every real estate brokerage is.
Could that be changing in California? Take note of this:
“Employers who previously were not concerned with minimum wage issues are now put on notice to ensure they are providing those basic protections to workers.”
And this:
After learning of the Bakersfield cases, California State Labor Commissioner Julie Su in September filed a $17 million lawsuit in Alameda County Superior Court on behalf of hundreds of other ZipRealty employees statewide. That lawsuit is pending.
Brokerages like Zip (and Redfin, etc.) have a greater exposure, because they operate too much like real businesses. But I can’t imagine what the 25,000 or so starving California Realtors might be thinking just now.
But I think I have a fair idea what their brokers are thinking…
The National Association of Realtors is propped up on three flimsy stilts: The real estate licensing laws, the “co-broke” — the cooperating brokerage fee behind the MLS system — and the IRS-sanctioned independent contractor “safe-harbor.”
Unheralded by anyone who knows why it matters, the “safe-harbor” took the first Read more
REWIND: Roughly one month ago, an 11 year old boy was in an altercation during recess. A classmate, known for his “unorthodox” playing style, decided to turn and throw a ball into his face from nearly point-blank range. This “unorthodox” classmate apparently thought it was very funny, and as the boy got up off the ground – hurt and embarrassed – the classmate continued laughing; so hard, in fact, that he fell down. The boy promptly kicked him in the ribs.
This being a public school and the classmate being not only a punk, but a crybabby too… an ambulance was called. The punk went to the hospital (nothing wrong), and returned the next day on crutches. (Why crutches? Because it’s hard to attract sympathy with a fake injury that no one can see…). The boy was suspended for 5 days. No, not the punk who assaulted his classmate; the boy who responded. You see, our public school system believes that only in the most extreme case of self-defense – one in which even the cowardly opportunity to run away is absent – will you not be punished for violence (and truth be told, it’s zero tolerance… so you’ll still be punished). The punk received less days of suspension. Apparently, faking an injury relieves one of responsibility for one’s actions. Upon returning to school, both boys were told in no uncertain terms to stay away from each other. Thus far, a disappointing but not surprising trip through the education industry.
FAST FORWARD: Last week both boys find themselves in the same group. The punk steals some candy from one in the group, and the boy – Mr. Five Day Suspension – elects to join in the chase. The punk falls down and the boy stands over him, one leg above his torso, in a universal sign of male dominance. No one touched anyone. Just then, two parents come around the corner and, based on what they are seeing, interpolate what must have happened previously. This same 11 year old boy is reported to have, once again, kicked the punk. The principal launches an “investigation” and commences to Read more
Witness:
But the stark fact before us is that great numbers still remain unemployed.
A large proportion of these unemployed and their dependents have been forced on the relief rolls. The burden on the Federal Government has grown with great rapidity. We have here a human as well as an economic problem. When humane considerations are concerned, Americans give them precedence. The lessons of history, confirmed by the evidence immediately before me, show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fibre. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit. It is inimical to the dictates of sound policy. It is in violation of the traditions of America. Work must be found for able—bodied but destitute workers.
The Federal Government must and shall quit this business of relief.
These games are no challenge in the Age of Google, but I think you’ll be surprised to learn the name of the author of this text.
This is from my book Janio at a Point. I wrote this in 1988 as a sort of blueprint to Agorism, anarcho-capitalism. It questions everything, which is why its proscriptions often meet resistance from people who are in love with human freedom except when it’s inconvenient or prevents them from pushing other people around. I would write the book differently today — and I plan to rewrite it before I die — but there is almost nothing I would change in its philosophy.
Information Hiding
We have looked at a number of the obviously tragic consequences of government, but there are others of which we can take account that are not so obvious. You can call it “beating a dead horse” if you want, a Madness. So be it. I want to make sure that horse stays dead…
All of these non-obvious effects are the result of what I call Information Hiding. We can easily see that government commits crimes: it taxes, regulates, conscripts, murders — all in a day’s work. And there is no barrier to our noticing that the state is lousy at keeping Crime from occurring and recovering losses. What is not so easy to notice is the way the government, by its crimes, contributes to non-governmental crimes…
This is no absolution. The man who wields a gun deserves to be shot. If he is misled by the state into thinking that this is an intelligent solution to the problem of survival, it is still only he who is in charge of his brain. It is still only he who motivates himself to pick up that gun. No matter what “egged him on” and how, it is still only he who is acting. If he commits a crime, he is at fault.
But it is worthwhile to look to the actions of government, to see if they do induce people to commit crimes. I say they do, and, moreover, that the actions of government tend to dilute the value of self-preservation and self-love. Beating a dead horse though it may be, I say that the idea of government is at war with human Read more
While reading Jeff’s post asking about how people can justify theft from others in the name of government, I was most stricken by the absolute denial from those who defended more and more taxation have over their own beliefs. Even though they clearly support socialism, and can put forward tales of great woe over why they believe socialism is needed, nowhere would they agree that what they espouse is socialism.
Sure, socialism has been demonized by conservatives over the years. But does that surprise you? Socialism is the opposite of what many conservatives profess to be. Yet, socialists, most of whom prefer to be called liberals, just can’t admit that they support theft by government force. None of the liberals who commented would admit they believed “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” They just don’t go there.
People are full of these contradictions. Warren Buffet was mentioned as an example in the comments of Jeff’s post, about his supposed concern about paying less in taxes than his secretary. Yet, this same Warren Buffet has been fighting against paying taxes he legally owes for years! What is that all about if he supports more taxation so much?
In the video above, Bill Maher, calls out Americans on what he calls their secret love of socialism. In the video Bill Maher says “It’s time to stop fighting it and just come out of the closet, and the group I’m talking about is the American public and the love they’re denying is their love of socialism. Now I know that there are few words in America more toxic than socialist, and these days big government spending is about as popular as Casey Anthony at a Chucky Cheese. Yes, Americans say they hate socialism but when it comes to Social Security, Medicare, unemployment, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, corporate welfare, bailouts, and farm subsidies, what we really say to socialism is I can’t quit you.”
He goes on from there. In this case, I agree with Bill Maher.
Certainly there is a disconnect between what many Americans say versus what they actually support. Liberals Read more
I could say I wish it were a joke, but the entire United States government is becoming a joke: Senator Charles Schumer (D-Hades) wants to give free visas to foreign nationals who buy luxury real estate:
Foreigners have accounted for a growing share of home purchases in South Florida, Southern California, Arizona and other hard-hit markets. Chinese and Canadian buyers, among others, are taking advantage not only of big declines in U.S. home prices and reduced competition from Americans but also of favorable foreign exchange rates.
To fuel this demand, the proposed measure would offer visas to any foreigner making a cash investment of at least $500,000 on residential real-estate—a single-family house, condo or townhouse. Applicants can spend the entire amount on one house or spend as little as $250,000 on a residence and invest the rest in other residential real estate, which can be rented out.
The measure would complement existing visa programs that allow foreigners to enter the U.S. if they invest in new businesses that create jobs. Backers believe the initiative would help soak up an excess supply of inventory when many would-be American home buyers are holding back because they’re concerned about their jobs or because they would have to take a big loss to sell their current house.
“This is a way to create more demand without costing the federal government a nickel,” Sen. Schumer said in an interview.
I love this on so many levels:
First, it’s more Rotarian Socialism: Subsidize the rich, since it’s their over-built, over-priced houses that aren’t selling.
Second, the proposal makes plain that U.S. immigration policy is just more Rotarian Socialism claptrap: It’s not about securing borders but securing pocketbooks.
But third, who wants to come here now? Not only is our economy crushed under the weight of a century of Rotarian Socialist kleptocracy, but there are actual proto-cannibal savages congregating in the public parks, goading each other into a homicidal rage. Any sane millionaire would have to say, “I left São Paolo for this?”
As always, Matt and Trey have the best answer to cant: “Vamos, Mantequilla!”
Alas, the judge wasn’t that honest. But he actually apologized for being instrumental in stealing the homestead of an innocent family under the color of law. The next time you look at your paycheck stub, just think: Sooner or later, some well-heeled gonoph in a Brooks Brothers just might apologize to you for ripping you off week after week. Won’t that be nice?
Dear Ms. Warren Buffett’s Secretary,
First, and on behalf of everyone who feels as I do, please accept our heartfelt condolence that you have been thrust onto the stage of national demagoguery and class-warfare. I can’t imagine being constantly referred to as: “Warren Buffett’s Secretary” on the national news and in speeches by the President of the United States of America. Having your personal income tax rate not only held up for scrutiny, but co-opted as the basis for raising taxes on someone else (someone who’s done you no harm that you are aware of), must also be an uncomfortable position indeed, made all the more so by the fact that your own boss put you there. Having said that… I feel compelled to answer the question that has thrust you into the hot spotlight of public scrutiny and in so doing, I hope to stop this before you become, like Farrah Fawcett before you, the poster child of prurient interest.
The question: Why do you, Warren Buffett’s Secretary, pay a greater tax rate than your boss Warren Buffett?
This was less than ably restated by the President of the United States of America today in his speech on raising taxes… I mean taming the deficit: “Warren Buffett’s secretary should not pay more in taxes than Warren Buffet.” You see, this is how demagoguery can get out of hand and the next thing you know, you are thumbtacked on bedroom walls all over the nation. So, before we can explain why you pay a higher rate than your boss, we must first help POTUS understand the different between a tax rate, and taxes paid. Mr. President, Warren Buffett’s Secretary pays a higher rate (a higher percentage) of her income in income taxes. This in no way suggests she pays more… as a matter of fact, Warren Buffett pays a great deal more taxes than his Secretary does; he just pays a lower combined rate.
To answer the specific question then: You, Warren Buffett’s Secretary, pay a higher rate of tax on your income because you, even being the hard working and integral part of Warren Buffett’s operation that you most assuredly must be, are trading time for money… That is to say, you show up Read more
We see this too often in our little world, a mob pile-on of snarky observations, continuous and hugely public. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. This is classic drama in action, all dressed up in modern gladrags.
Tell us what you think. I’m off-topic, but the whole world is off-topic…
This is an article whose inception has come from some recent interactions on other blogs with regard to NAR’s update of Article 10 of the Code of Ethics concerning discrimination against sexual orientation. Though I participated in commentary on this topic, what really was bothering me was what follows. Simply put, I’m pretty damned tired of being proselytized and dumbed down by NAR, and even more tired of watching the planet forsake common sense because crafty special interest groups have figured out how to dilute the “Fathertongue” so as to render it useless.
I’m against “Gay Marriage”, and wanted to talk with you about why.
Wait, excuse me for a minute…there’s a bunch of people at my door. Oh my, it’s the ACLU, some folks with signs with something about LGBT on them, some reporters from MSNBC, and even someone from NAR with a photocopy of the newly amended Article 10 sexual orientation anti-discriminatory verbiage.
Ground rule #1 – This is not about religion. Yes, I am a Christian, and yes Christians mostly believe that gay marriage is not appropriate. Yes, I’m one of them. But in this article you get no traction with any comments slamming Christianity. This is not about my faith. As with most “discrimination” issues, I am well able to separate my philosophy and faith from an honest discussion about rule of law, society, sociology, the family, and more importantly, the long hand of a master to whom I owe no allegiance.
Your Right to Throw a Punch Ends Where My Nose Begins
This saying has been a way of life for me for as long as I was able to stick up for myself. Hopefully you won’t find the saying controversial. It’s a reminder that I am an individual, complete and independent, and while we do in fact interact, your right to exercise your independence ends where my “nose” begins. You may shout or debate. You may whisper behind my back, or come to my door with placards. You may join with your own pugilists to wage war on my philosophy. You may lobby and convince. All these things you may Read more
A couple of real estate headlines from the you-have-to-laugh section of the news-nets:
From the New York Times, when a bank is too big to fail, you have to rescue it so you can sue it later. Missing, for some reason, from the list of parties to be sued: Barney Franks, Christopher Dodd, Andrew Cuomo, the NAR — and FannieMae and FreddieMac. Given that crony-“capitalist” Warren (tax-me-more-please) Buffett just dumped billions into the Bank of America, I’m thinking we can look forward to this lawsuit ending with a whimper.
Meanwhile, in bucolic New London, CT, the land that the city fought all the way to the Supreme Court for the “right” to steal in the famous Kelo case is now — wait for it — a dumping ground. Nice.
And this is bad news?
That entire Reuters article is interesting, as will be the forthcoming stories on President Obama’s big, big plans to put Americans to work.
Two important facts emerge, I think:
First, no one in the entire ruling class has any idea how jobs are created. Stimulating demand while you stymie production is just another way of driving up prices at the cash register.
But second, I think Obama is managing to do what decades of conservative and libertarian ideologues have failed to do: He is demonstrating the futility of the entire Keynesian approach to government.
It’s an internet effect, of course. The massive increase in information velocity makes smoke-and-mirrors academic obfuscation more and more difficult.
But Obama’s uncanny political ineptitude is making it that much easier for Americans to discover that, for all the hype, the emperor has always been naked.
I’m kicking this back to the top, which I think means no one will read it. 😉 In fact, I’m moving stuff like this to SplendorQuest.com, going forward. I think this an insanely-great essay, but it reads better elsewhere.
But: The comments to this post are amazing, BloodhoundBlog at its very best. Here are two of my remarks, illuminating why I am moving content like this and what I plan to do at SplendorQuest.com:
Celebrating my self: I have amazing things to say about the ontology and teleology of egoism and individualism, and virtually no one is paying any attention at all. I would be frustrated, except I can’t be: It’s raining soup in my mind, even if in no one else’s.
And:
I don’t have any organizational goals, I just want to induce people to think better, if I can. It’s a good thing for me, in the long run, since I stand to do better when other people do better — and since I’m pretty much incinerator-bait if things go to hell. But I know that the people I’m talking to will do better if they learn to seek Splendor in their lives. If I give anyone any time at all, my objective is to get that person to question his most basic assumptions about how the universe works. That much is not a kindness, at least at first, since people don’t generally love having the stilts kicked out from under them. But that’s “how much and how far” I want to go. There is no other way to get here from there.
“Save the world from home in your spare time!” I love that joke. But that’s what I plan to do, as time and minds permit. Come play with me, if the quest for Splendor moves you. –GSS
A rallying cry for the Tea Party rebellion: “You’re not the boss of me!”
I love that phrase — “You’re not the boss of me!” — those words, that order, that emphasis. Children say it when they’re put upon, and I love it so much I write it into their mouths in fiction, too.
The sentence has Read more
Dang. There goes the NAR’s chance to force every American to buy three or four more houses, thus to save the starving real estate brokers.
As President Obama himself has noted, there is something wrong with our politics when perfectly reliable campaign donors cannot despoil the taxpayers at will, without judicial interference…