Tag: hit&run

11/28/1872: Justice Samuel Nelson resigns.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2Dr76YB
via IFTTT

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2pY9tyR
via IFTTT

An internal investigation found that Gwinnett County, Georgia, police officer Todd Ramsey had a YouTube video playing on his patrol car computer monitor when he rear-ended an SUV at nearly 70 mph. The accident left the driver of the SUV in a coma for four weeks. Ramsey was cited for following too closely and demoted. An Atlanta TV station reports this was the eighth traffic accident Ramsey has been involved with where he was found to be at fault. Ramsey had a Grand Theft Auto gameplay video playing at the time of the accident.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2OqGM7e
via IFTTT

At a time when our country seems as divided as ever and many are talking as if the end times are coming, it’s more important than ever to look at what we should be thankful for.

Unemployment is at its lowest level in nearly 50 years. Poverty is down, too. Since 1990, average life expectancy in the United States increased from 75.4 to 78.6 years. Our workplaces are also safer, as demonstrated by the 30 percent decline in the rate of workplace deaths from 1992 to 2017 and a 69 percent drop in the rate of workplace injury and illness.

Our cities and country as a whole are safer, with crime rates falling dramatically. In fact, Washington, D.C. experienced an incredible increase among the world’s safest cities ranking. It jumped from the 23rd safest city in the world in 2017 to number 7 in 2019. Negative indicators, such as teen pregnancies and abortion rates, are also declining.

While some argue that real wages have been stagnant for several decades—when measured with the correct inflation deflator and adjusted for fringe benefits, taxes, and transfers—real incomes of ordinary Americans have unquestionably increased. The same is true of real median household income, especially after adjusting for household size.

While millions of manufacturing and other “middle-skill” jobs have disappeared, that decline has been more than offset by an increase in the number of high-skilled jobs. In fact, a look at the data reveals that while the middle class has indeed thinned out, it’s because more and more Americans are joining the upper class, a phenomenon that we should applaud. Meanwhile, the share of the low-income households has shrunk over the years.

Few of us realize how much better off we are today than were our grandparents and great-grandparents. For all the negative talk about how families struggle to survive on their current wages compared with prior decades, the fact is that this notion has more to do with our rising expectations of what we should be able to consume than with any genuine decline in our ability to consume. Research from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, for instance, shows that if the average worker today wanted to achieve the living standard of 1950, he or she would only need to work for 11 weeks annually. To achieve the living standard of 1975, one would only need to work 23 weeks.

Of course, most people don’t choose to work so few weeks. We instead work most of the year to increase our relative standard of living compared to prior years. As economist David Autor explains in his research that asks, “Will automation take away our jobs?” (the answer is no), “Material abundance has never eliminated perceived scarcity.” In other words, the fact that most of us don’t realize how much more we have than those who came before us doesn’t negate the fact that we are incredibly lucky.

Our lives, especially those of lower-income workers, would get even better if state and local governments eliminated some of the policies that artificially obstruct access to better labor markets. Land and zoning regulations are great examples. These rules play an oversized role in increasing housing costs in higher-wage areas, making it harder for low-income workers to move and improve their situation.

Likewise, occupational-licensing statutes raise barriers separating workers from better jobs. These requirements obstruct interstate mobility, as licenses typically can’t be transferred across jurisdictions. They also increase the price of goods and services like child care, which hurts parents who wish to stay in the work force.

There are too many examples to list in this column. Yet removing just the barriers mentioned here would lead to more opportunities and better lives for those who are now frozen out of the gains enjoyed by many.

The truth is that if you look for bad news, you can easily find it. Some trends, such as the hike in opioid overdoses and teenage suicides or the fact that some workers have permanently dropped out of the labor force, are sources of real concern. However, looking for bad news is what most of us do most of the year. During this time of Thanksgiving, we should take a moment to focus on the good news. It will help us feel grateful for our lives.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/35Frl0I
via IFTTT

California’s top pot cops have sent out hundreds of letters warning landlords that they face potential civil and criminal penalties if they allow unlicensed marijuana shops on their premises.

The Bureau of Cannabis Control, which oversees the state’s legal marijuana industry, noted Tuesday that it’s using the same laws the state has historically used against drug dens to punish landlords who allow retail marijuana dispensaries to operate without proper government approval.

Under California law, any landlord who knowingly leases space for the unlawful manufacturing, storing, or selling of a controlled substance faces up to a year in jail. And, of course, the government can then seize your property.

One might think that the legalization of marijuana retail sales and use would render such this state law—a remnant of the drug war—moot, but the Bureau of Cannabis Control wants to assure landlords otherwise. The Bureau’s letter adds that anybody assisting in the operation of an illegal dispensary faces the same potential criminal penalties as if they had directly committed the offense. Furthermore, because the state actually does have legally regulated marijuana sales, violating the licensing laws now can lead to an additional set of punishments that didn’t exist before. Anybody operating an illegal dispensary faces fines of up to $30,000 a day.

Bureau Chief Lori Ajax explains:

“This action is an important step in the state’s effort to combat the illegal cannabis market. It is our hope that by detailing the penalties faced by landlords who rent their space to illegal operators, landlords will better understand the severe consequences that could come with knowingly facilitating illegal commercial cannabis activity and those currently breaking the law will have fewer options where they can conduct their businesses.”

It’s yet another reminder of the shambles California has made of legalized marijuana. Overregulation, high taxes, and a foot-dragging bureaucracy has made it cheaper and more reasonable for the black market to continue—this time in storefronts that don’t have an official government stamp of approval. Reason has previously covered how the state’s mismanagement and insistence on squeezing marijuana dispensaries for every cent they can get will guarantee that illegal marijuana sales will continue. One industry estimate puts the number of illegally operating pot shops in the state at nearly 3,000.

The Bureau of Cannabis Control offers a database where you can check to see if a pot dispensary is legally licensed by the state. Out of curiosity, I checked the names of two pot shops I pass by regularly between my home and Reason‘s Los Angeles office. Neither dispensary shows up on the list.

The state has nobody to blame for this situation but government itself. Turning to more harsh legal threats and using the exact same tools designed to shut down crack houses—prosecuting landlords and taking their properties—shows exactly how little the Golden State has learned from the drug war.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2QYHWbE
via IFTTT

The U.S. total fertility rate (TFR) has dropped to below 1.73 births per woman according to a new report from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). This record low edges out the previous U.S. fertility nadir of 1.74 births per woman back in 1976.

The NCHS notes that the TFR for the U.S. in 2018 remained below replacement, the level at which a given generation can exactly replace itself (usually defined as 2.1 births per woman). In addition, the TFR was below replacement for all race and Hispanic-origin groups in 2018, except for Pacific Islanders. Overall, the U.S. TFR has generally been below replacement since 1971.

In general, American women of all races are having children later in life. In the 1960s, the mean age for a mother’s first birth was 23.3 years. The new report notes that for all ethnic groups, the mean age of mothers at first birth has been rising and has now reached a national average of 26.9 years.

U.S. fertility rates appear to be following the downward below-replacement trend seen in other developed countries. For example, the overall TFR for the 28 countries in the European Union is just under 1.6 births per woman; Japan’s is at 1.4 births; Australia’s is at 1.74 births, and Canada’s is 1.5 births. Why are fertility rates falling around the world?

In my book, The End of Doom, I reported on how the life prospects of women shape reproductive outcomes, as analyzed in a fascinating 2010 article in Human Nature, “Examining the Relationship Between Life Expectancy, Reproduction, and Educational Attainment.” In that study, University of Connecticut anthropologists Nicola Bulled and Richard Sosis divvied up 193 countries into five groups by their average life expectancies. In countries where women could expect to live to between 40 and 50 years, they bear an average of 5.5 children, while those countries with female life expectancies between 51 and 61 average 4.8 children. The big drop in fertility occurs at that point. Bulled and Sosis found that when women’s life expectancy rises to between 61 and 71 years, total fertility drops to 2.5 children; between 71 and 75 years, it’s 2.2 children; and over 75 years, women average 1.7 children.

As global average life expectancy rose from 52.6 years in 1960 to 72.4 years now, the global total fertility rate has fallen from 5 births per woman in 1960 to 2.4 births now. Average global life expectancy is projected to exceed 77 years by 2050. If Bulled and Sosis’s insights continue to hold, global TFR should fall to around 1.7 births per woman by then. As noted in the NCHS report, U.S. TFR has been below replacement since 1971, which, as it happens, is exactly the year that average life expectancy for American women reached 75 years.

Is falling fertility a bad thing? Obviously not for those still benighted folks worried about a supposedly exploding population bomb.

However, earlier this month there was a lot of anxious handwringing about falling fertility rates in the New York Times opinion article, “The End of Babies.” According to the op-ed’s author, Anna Louie Sussman, the culprit responsible for falling fertility rates is “late capitalism.” She doesn’t mean “just the economic system, but all its attendant inequalities, indignities, opportunities, and absurdities—[have] become hostile to reproduction. Around the world, economic, social, and environmental conditions function as a diffuse, barely perceptible contraceptive.”

Sussman does acknowledge that declining fertility “reflects better educational and career opportunities for women, increasing acceptance of the choice to be child-free, and rising standards of living.” Nevertheless, she blames employers and governments for failing to make parenting and work compatible. To her credit, Sussman begins by noting the vast array of pro-natalist policies mandated in Denmark including 12 months’ paid family leave for new parents, highly subsidized daycare, and state-funded in vitro fertilization for women under 40 years of age. And yet Denmark’s TFR is just 1.7 births per woman, almost exactly the same as that of the U.S.

Modernity, a.k.a, late capitalism, clearly offers people a multitude of life options that compete with the bearing and rearing of children. Evidently the trade-offs between work, travel, socializing, entertainment, sports, and parenting that people are making reduce fertility. Attempts to skew trade-offs toward more childbearing may have some effect—Denmark’s fertility rate rose from 1.4  in 1983 to 1.7 births per woman now—but in no developed country so far have pro-natalist policies sustained fertility above the replacement rate.

We do know, however, what policies do sustain high fertility rates: Low incomes, low education levels, high levels of violence, defective rule of law, extensive corruption, lack of property rights, and despotic government. I doubt that even the most ardent pro-natalists would advocate a reversion to Malthusian hell-holes as a way to boost fertility.

The upshot is that modern people considering their options are voluntarily choosing to have fewer children. Freedom of choice is a good thing.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2ONMwXy
via IFTTT

It’s that time of the year again. You’ve retreated to your old bedroom, safely hidden from your family’s Thanksgiving weekend guests, and you’re wondering how you can support Reason and complete your Amazon Christmas shopping in this quiet moment.

We have the solution! When you head to Amazon, whether for gifts or for everyday needs, please consider starting right here. Thanks to the Amazon Smile program, your favorite libertarian magazine can enjoy a nice little kickback. And you don’t have to worry about showing up to Christmas empty-handed.

Thinking of using Amazon after the holidays? No worries. You can use this handy link year-round.

Wondering about your privacy? Don’t worry: We can’t see any reader’s individual purchases, and we wouldn’t judge you even if we could. But we can see what you and your fellow Reasoners have purchased as a group. In fact, we’ve used those recommendations for this handy gift guide.

The presidential election is in full swing. Show off your support for orb queen Marianne Williamson by donning your very own set of wizard robes, created with the help of these sewing patterns. The Yang Gang can cop this extra-long, microfibre tie…and then promptly throw it away because no one has time for neck shackles! Speaking of cops, maybe you’re part of the #KHive. (For you folks without Twitter: That’s Kamala Harris’ supporters.) In that case, here’s a traditional-style California jailbird costume. OK ladies, now let’s incarceration!

With all that’s going on in international politics, why not take the time to read up on the history of the People’s Republic of China? Try Mao’s Great Famine: The History of China’s Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958–1962. Or perhaps you want to stay closer to home. Luckily for you, Reason‘s own Robby Soave released Panic Attack: Young Radicals in the Age of Trump earlier this year. Want to travel back in time? Check out this book on magic, conspiracy theories, and of course anarchism.

Reading government abuse stories on Reason certainly works up an appetite and y’all surely love some soup. A lot of soup. So much soup. Here are some lozenges, since you’re clearly sick. Don’t forget food safety! Mrs. Meyers has you covered on freshly-scented hand soap.

Do you believe people should be able to voluntarily sell their kidneys? Make your point by sticking these fake gory human body parts all over the place. The pieces are pre-cut, but don’t let that deter you from purchasing this saw wheel.

And then there’s this vibrating cock ring, a sensible second purchase following last year’s fleshlight.

Of course, you shouldn’t look over the greatest gift of all, a Reason subscription! Year-end tax-deductible charitable donations are also welcome.

While you’re watching Black Friday fights from the comfort of your old bedroom, thank your lucky stars that your own Black Friday and Cyber Monday shopping, complete with a little donation to Reason, is one simple click away.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/34oMWKI
via IFTTT

The House of Representatives has issued several subpoenas related to its impeachment inquiry. The Supreme Court may resolve the validity of some of these subpoenas in the near future. Other subpoenas, which are not on expedited tracks, would not be resolved until after the 2020 election.

What happens to the latter category of subpoenas if the President is impeached, and subsequently acquitted in the Senate of all charges? Could the President move to dismiss all pending cases as moot?

Perhaps the House would counter that it needs the information to consider another impeachment inquiry. After all, the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment does not control the impeachment process. (Ditto for the Sixth Amendment.) In theory at least, the House could enter into a permanent impeachment inquiry–keep searching for new evidence until it can make the case to convict the President.

If the cases do become moot, then many of these cases may never be resolved by the courts.

I highly recommend Charlie Savage’s article in the Times. He details how the Trump administration can win, merely by pushing the litigation deadlines beyond the scope of a Senate trial.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/35CU3zh
via IFTTT

“The Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee have unearthed enough evidence, in my opinion, to justify about three or four articles of impeachment against the president,” Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Andrew Napolitano tells Nick Gillespie in a wide-ranging podcast.

Since joining Fox News in the early 2000s, no cable news personality has been more uncompromisingly libertarian than Andrew Napolitano, a former New Jersey Superior Court judge and best-selling author who now serves as senior judicial analyst at Fox and host of the Liberty File on the streaming service Fox Nation. During the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, the judge inveighed against the growth of the federal government and overreach by the executive branch. Now, Donald Trump has earned Napolitano’s ire.

The allegations are not “enough to convict [the president] of bribery” in a court of law, Napolitano says, “but it’s enough to allege it for the purpose of impeachment” since impeachment is “not legal [but] political.” The judge adds that while he thinks impeachment is “absolutely constitutional,” it is also “probably morally unjust.” Besides bribery, he lays out four more likely articles that he thinks House Democrats will bring against Trump.

“The second charge will be high crimes and misdemeanors, election law violation,” says Napolitano. “The third crime will be obstruction of justice. The fourth will be interference with a witness and the fifth may be lying under oath.”

Over the past few months, Napolitano has emerged as one of Trump’s harshest critics, claiming back in May that the Mueller Report demonstrated that the president had clearly obstructed justice. In response to the judge’s comments, the president issued a series of angry tweets accusing Napolitano of seeking a seat on the Supreme Court and personal favors (the judge denies all claims in this exclusive Reason interview).

Though he thinks the recent House hearings provide grounds for impeachment, the judge finds it unlikely that the Republican-controlled Senate will vote to remove the president—and that the bigger problem is the way federal government continues to arrogate power to itself.

“No American president in the post–Woodrow Wilson era has stayed within the confines of the Constitution,” says Napolitano. “And each president has more authority than his predecessors, for the simple reason that Democratic Congresses give power to Democratic presidents and Republican Congresses give power to Republican presidents. That power stays in the presidency. So Donald Trump actually has more authority than Barack Obama did, who had more authority than George W. Bush did, etc.”

Napolitano argues that the federal government stays in power by “bribing” states and individuals with giveaways. The result, he says, is unsustainable debt that will ultimately undermine the economy and with it, social order. “The decline of certain types of cultural gatekeepers that said no [to] certain lifestyles obviously is liberating,” notes Napolitano. “But the same technology which lets me put the works of Thomas Aquinas in my pocket also lets the government follow me wherever I go and record whatever conversation I have with Gillespie or whoever I’m talking to, the Constitution be damned.”

Make sure to subscribe to this podcast by using the buttons to the right.

For a video version of this interview, go here.

Audio production by Ian Keyser.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2L0zgO8
via IFTTT

George Mason economist and recreational controversialist Bryan Caplan has teamed up with artist Zach Weinersmith of Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal fame for one of the most ambitious crossovers in nerd history. The result of their partnership is a surprisingly readable visual case for open borders, in which a cartoon Caplan grapples with zombies, hangs out with basketball players, and quarrels with Milton Friedman.

The arguments in Open Borders: The Science and Ethics of Immigration are rather sophisticated and extremely entertaining—much more so on both fronts than skeptics of the genre might expect. 

Of particular note is a lively debate about Friedman’s claim that “you cannot simultaneously have free immigration and a welfare state,” and other libertarian arguments against open borders. The bespectacled cartoon Friedman looks enough like Caplan himself that Weinersmith has distinguished the two by draping a Nobel Prize around Friedman’s neck, a charitable gesture to the person he’s arguing against.

Katherine Mangu-Ward sat down with Caplan to talk about why he can’t stop picking fights, common arguments against open borders, and what his family owes to immigration.

Camera and intro by Meredith Bragg. Additional camera by Austin Bragg. Edited by Ian Keyser.

photo and music credits:
“Backbay Lounge” by Kevin MacLeod (https://incompetech.com)
License: CC BY (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
photo: Christina Xu CC 2.0

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/37M1d63
via IFTTT