This story looks at the pros and cons of the European currency the Euro. About halfway through the story they talk about why the US dollar has not caused as many problem as the Euro. The reason why I bring it up is because they talk about how when one individual country in Europe runs into problems they used to be able to print their own money. However, the incorporation of the Euro these countries have less tools available to alleviate the problems of their people. This can lead to high unemployment. The story goes on to explain that when one American state faces high unemployment the unemployed move to other states. The story goes on to explain why those in European countries can not move as easily and gives a variety of reasons why. One amusing explanation they gave was that the unemployed in one language don’t speak the language to another country. Which is why the US does not have a huge immigration problem from the south.

What makes the NPR the National Liberal Radio is the failure to mention the most obvious explanation as to why people in Europe don’t switch countries when their home country has high unemployment. Overall, European country are much more socialized than the US. As a result unemployment rates are much higher. Thus, people are less likely to move because the unemployment in other countries is already higher and this creates a dearth of job opportunities. Since the narrative that socialized democracies don’t help unemployed is counter to the typical liberal rhetoric, its unsurprising that this explanation is ignored by the NLR. Excluding obvious conservative explanations when explaining some economic situation is what is meant by National Liberal Radio.

Surprising in the list of reasons they give, the fail to mention a rather large and obvious problem. Since the majority of European nations are much more nationalized, unemployment

They Supreme Court has picked up a case looking at whether the First amendment grants protesters the right to express political discontent at military funerals.

The court agreed Monday to consider whether the protesters’ message, no matter how provocative and upsetting, is protected by the First Amendment. Members of a Kansas-based church have picketed military funerals to spread their belief that U.S. deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq are punishment for the nation’s tolerance of homosexuality.

These are the protesters who show up to military funerals with signs saying the soldiers deaths were brought forth by god in retaliation for society acceptance of homosexuality. Clearly their message is disgusting and their behavior repulsive. Nevertheless freedom of speech gives them the right to express their hatred. To be perfectly frank i don’t even know why the Supreme Court agreed to take up this case. It clearly states in the constitution that people have the right express their views publicly even if the vast majority find that view morally repulsive.

Interesting, those on the left that advocate for hate crimes may need to favor the Supreme Court ruling to restrict their free speech to state consistent with their position. Its hard to see how this speech is anything but hateful.

Apparently in Brittan they are fitting trash containers with devices to measure weight. That way they can charge households by how much they throw away.

This is an increase of nearly two-thirds in just a year. The bins, which can be electronically identified and weighed, are designed for ‘pay-as-you-throw’ rubbish tax schemes.
wheelie bins

Under such schemes - which are likely to be hugely unpopular - families who put out more waste will pay higher taxes to their local council.

Disclosure of the rapid spread of chipped bins followed the announcement this week of the first council to bring in a bin tax. Bristol City is presenting its scheme as a reward for recyclers, with cash payments to homes that leave out less rubbish.

I like this idea. Getting consumers closer to the ‘actual’ cost of a service generally is more beneficial then otherwise.

This piece looks at how politicians have been trying to figure out how to pay Doctors for over 40 years. They have been failing ever since and it makes one wonder why you would ever want the state to take over health care. I would like to add, that determining the price of health care is not that hard, if you just get the fuck out of the way and let the market do it. You don’t need to ask doctors their worth, you don’t need smart people to create spreadsheets with the value of every single health care procedure, and you don’t need the GDP to cap health care worth. I know for really smart technocrats on the left this can be hard to hear, but to solve the complicated problem of pricing health care you get the fuck out of the way. The system will price itself, dumbass.