by John Murphy

According to Congressman Andrew Ogles (R-TN)’s interview with The Epoch Times‘ Roger L. Simon, we know McCarthy made these concessions to win over his opposition:

1. Jeffersonian Motion – It takes only one congressperson to bring a vote on the removal of the McCarthy as Speaker. This was the policy in place before Nancy Pelosi removed it. 
2. A Church Committee to investigate possible overreach in surveillance by the FBI and other government organizations.

If there is one thing libertarians can be optimistic about, it is the appointment of a congressman that was not one of the 20 “Never-Kevins”: Part of the concessions to the Freedom Caucus was to appoint Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) as head of the Church Committee. 

This will give Massie the ability to investigate and bring light to waste in any area of the federal government.  After the revelations made in the past by Snowden and others, as well as Elon Musk recently, finally many mainstream Republicans in the party are ready for investigations into potential overreach.  

1. Bills presented to Congress will be single subject, not omnibus, with all the attendant earmarks, and there will be a 72-hour minimum period to read them.

2. The Texas Border Plan will be put before Congress. From The Hill: “The four-pronged plan aims to ‘Complete Physical Border Infrastructure,’ ‘Fix Border Enforcement Policies,’ ‘Enforce our Laws in the Interior’ and ‘Target Cartels & Criminal Organizations.’”

3. COVID mandates will be ended as well as all funding for them including “emergency funding.”

4. Budget bills would stop the endless increases in the debt ceiling and hold the Senate accountable for the same.

By now libertarians know to set low expectations when it comes to the Republican Party and spending, but with a split government, it sounds like they are comfortable again back to at least talking a good game in regards to COVID funding and the debt ceiling.

We also know from Rep. Lauren Boebert’s (R-CO) comments that

1. A vote on term limits will be a priority

Inevitably there are rumors of the existence of other concessions that have not been made public.  Could there be something related to January 6th?  A Dr. Fauci investigation?  Or a Biden impeachment vote?  Perhaps these are the insider details that we will never know.  

The last four days has shown the establishment running up and down the aisles of Congress in disbelief that they were facing such a struggle with a vote that they expected to be purely procedural.  Some libertarians may have also taken enjoyment in the fact that during the process Congress has been at a legislative standstill.

It will be interesting to see where McCarthy finds “compromise” between the different parts of the modern day GOP. Could this division be a foreshadow of more challenge for the party to find common ground between the establishment and the various groups passionately fighting to define conservatism? And could this be the start of Republicans realizing that libertarianism is the heart of conservatism and that it’s also good politically?

People respect principled politicians and since COVID a whole lot of people have been hoping for a real alternative to the status quo. Freedom is exactly what the people need. And as much as they try to vilify people that think like Massie, in his new position he will be able to be a libertarian voice that represents freedom well. It will be one more step towards convincing non political types that a free society is not only what is morally right but also what generates the most prosperity for everybody. 

The post Libertarians Win With McCarthy’s Concessions For Speaker appeared first on The Libertarian Republic.

Tomorrow, I am voting Yes on Amendment 3. I am also a conservative Republican. The amendment would change the Missouri Constitution to legalize marijuana for adults over age 21, allow individuals to grow their own marijuana, and set up a licensing scheme for legal sales of marijuana in Missouri. I believe that marijuana prohibition has always been an abridgement of individual rights as understood by our Founding Fathers. America is a nation founded on the idea of individual liberty. These arguments have been fleshed out many times over the past decade of drug reform in America, so I am going to address some arguments against Amendment 3 and the most important reason I think you should support it.

There are two main opponents to Amendment 3. First, there are traditional prohibitionists. They believe that there is no limit to what the government can impose on us to make us participate in healthy behaviors. I don’t believe I can convince this group as I have a fundamentally different view of the duty of government. I believe government is instituted to protect life, liberty, and property. Prohibitionists believe government should push us to be healthy, moral, and otherwise raise us from cradle to grave. I believe my view is more in line with conservatism and the other with big government progressivism. The second set of opponents are self-described supporters of marijuana legalization. Why would they be a “no” on this amendment and why do I disagree? Their arguments consist of three major points. 

First, they argue that legalization should be passed through the legislature and into statute rather than the constitution. I work in the Missouri legislature as a staff member. I know the chances of passing a legalization bill are slim to none. Modest marijuana reform proposals have come before the legislature many times in the past and been stopped dead in their tracks long before coming close to passage. This argument is just not based on the political reality of Missouri politics. 

Secondly, they argue that the licensing system for marijuana business is too restrictive, making it hard for entrepreneurs to get involved in the legal marijuana trade. This is a fair concern with the amendment, but the idea that we will get something better from the legislature is a pipe dream. When the legislature passed a modest bill to legalize CBD oil for medical purposes several years ago, the amount of licenses the state created could be counted on one hand. Lacking a serious alternative proposal or plan to achieve a more free-market marijuana legalization plan, I cannot take this argument against Amendment 3 seriously. 

The third and final argument is that Amendment 3 adds criminal prohibitions to the Missouri Constitution because it stipulates a maximum possession of three ounces with penalties for going over. What this argument ignores is that it also adds to the Missouri Constitution legalization of far more marijuana than the amount an average individual consumer would normally carry. For those who don’t know, three ounces is far more than the average person needs to feel intoxicating effects of marijuana. Furthermore, current statute allows for no amount of legal marijuana possession. Every year, thousands of Missourians are fined, arrested, and/or given criminal records for minor possession of marijuana. This is a travesty in comparison to the other objections to Amendment 3 coming from certain supporters of legalization.

My support for Amendment 3 rests on that final point. If we believe that marijuana legalization is the best policy, we can’t stand to wait another several rounds of elections for a better law to pass. We must protect those possessing personal amounts of marijuana from government penalty in the form of fine, jail, and criminal record. Vote Yes on Amendment 3 to take some big steps toward a more humane drug policy in the state of Missouri. Whatever problems you might have with the amendment, they pale in comparison to allowing the status quo to continue.

The post Why I’m Voting To Legalize Weed in Missouri appeared first on The Libertarian Republic.

You’ve come a long way, baby. But we’re not done yet. Today we’re discussing your favorite topic — you. You’re in the spotlight. But you can’t use Instagram filters or FUPA-slimming camera angles for this close-up. Can you allow yourself to feel exposed? Good. Doors are locked. Blinds are shut. Drapes pulled tight. It’s just you and me. Let’s begin.

17. Political people are not your friends. If you think 2 percent of your political acquaintances will be there for you when things get ugly, you’re deluding yourself by 100 percent to the upside.

Ask Jeff Smith how many people came to visit him in federal prison when he was locked up for campaign finance violations.

I know, I know. You think you’re special. You’re the exception to this rule, aren’t you? You’re not.

Expect very little from your political acquaintances. The relationships are almost always symbiotic and/or transactional.

18. Actionable item: Once you accept that political people are not your friends, take meaningful action to not be a political person. Refuse to revert to the mean.

Hey Republicans: Why haven’t you reached out to David Barklage in the months since he was indicted for tax evasion? “Because I’m a selfish right-wing pig and he might no longer be of use to me,” is a better answer than whatever your defensive mind is rationalizing right now. You managed to find his e-mail and cell number when you needed advice, a job referral, or when your piddly state rep campaign needed a couple end-of-quarter fundraising favors. But you haven’t taken five minutes to offer him something, anything, in the five most arduous months of his life, which included the death of his mother. Will you allow yourself to lift your head up, take a brief and uncomfortable moment to think about your words, and reach out to him today? Or will you sit there with your hunched back and craned neck and mindlessly scroll your social accounts after you read this? Don’t answer. I already know.

Dear Democrats: Do you know where former state Rep. Courtney Curtis (D-Ferguson) is serving time? No, because he’s out of sight and out of mind. “But he violated the public truuusssst!” you moan in a nasally National Public Radio voice. You can manufacture crocodile tears for confessed triple-murderers on death row, but you can’t demonstrate genuine compassion and empathy for a man who carried your flag for years in Ferguson. He just switched prisons. Here’s his new address. You could write him today, but you won’t. You’ll be too busy compulsively checking your phone to see who’s liked your latest snarky hot take on masks or the Facebook picture of your “fur babies.” Won’t you?

If you’ve never been publicly hammered (attacked, not drunk), open this link in a new tab and read it when you’re done here: “Faughn: What I learned when I got knocked off my horse.”

Would you — yes, you — like to be judged by your worst moments and poorest decisions? I’m looking doubly hard at you, Christian conservatives.

19. Politics, and political journalism, are dream jobs for those who choose to be mentally unwell. Do you “thrive in a fast-paced environment” and love working “under pressure?” These are often coping euphemisms for, “I am addicted to chaos” and, “I don’t believe I deserve peace.”

If there’s a void in your heart that must be filled by others’ praise, step right up and run for the General Assembly. Don’t worry that you’ll become complacent once you get elected — that’s just the beginning. To steal and contort a promo from the late 20th-century philosopher Paul Levesque — you’re working in Jefferson City during legislative session. Your wife is at home, what’s she doing? Don’t know. Your husband is at home, what’s he doing? Don’t know. You get home from Jeff City on Thursday night, congrats — the work is just starting. Now you’ve got to be super-husband, super-wife, super-mom, super-dad.

Journalists, how does it feel to report on the actions of elected officials, staffers, lobbyists, and business people whom you’re conditioned to believe are not nearly as smart as you? They don’t even have a journalism degree, for Pulitzer’s sake! But they make bank. At least, the don’t-have-to-worry-about-rent-or-gas-or-beer kind of bank. Must be nice. Meanwhile, you’re always on deadline. Finish it up. Good enough. Hit send. God forbid you get a name or statistic wrong, or some prick in Chesterfield with a hobby blog will call you out by name in the morning.

20. Actionable item: If you hope to be mentally well one day, minimize the role of politics in your identity today. Disclosure: I am batshit crazy. Certified. But this entire “20 for 20” is about you, not me, so I’ll keep holding the mirror up to you.

For starters, you probably care too much about being offended or offending others. If you haven’t read the FAQ for readers and journalists, here’s abridged #2: “If you’re an adult who feels emotionally triggered by the wording of Missouri political news headlines, I’d suggest seeking help from a mental health professional. Concurrently, I’d also suggest investing time identifying exactly why a headline signaling a potentially differing view on a public policy topic moves you down the emotional scale.”

Secondly, you’re likely obsessing over insignificant distractions. To quote native Missourian Dana Loesch, in her latest book Grace Cancelled: You don’t have to attend every fight you’re invited to (p.141).

Liberals: Some flapjack wino whose candidate you beat last election is calling you a “Karen” on Twitter and desperately trying to make a hashtag about it happen. Your heart rate accelerates every time you see a Twitter notification pop up on your phone. (You choose to receive notifications because you’re addicted to fight-or-flight stress hormones.) You’re losing sleep at night. Is your reputation in your district or your region so fragile that a Twitter troll will end your career? No, it’s not. You don’t have to attend every fight you’re invited to.

Conservatives: Some neckbeard soyboy with pronouns in his Twitter profile is offended by something you wrote. That’s right — a grown man is claiming to be injured not by your physical actions, not by your fists or your feet or your firearms — but by your words. Even better is when he’s offended on behalf of someone else. Maybe he even calls you a racist. That word meant something five years ago, pre-Trump Derangement Syndrome. Today, like the Fed money printer going Brrrrrr, there’s so much of that currency flying around everywhere that it lost its value. After all, everything is racist today — heat is racist and roads are racist and having to avoid deer on the drive home exemplifies white privilege. Hell, NPR even convicted Dave Chappelle of white privilege. Should you or Chappelle respond? Say it with me: You don’t have to attend every fight you’re invited to.

Here’s the tricky thing: Success in politics is, by definition, based on external validation. Candidates need votes. Consultants and lobbyists need clients. Journalists need readers. You will never achieve a state of imperturbability — in practical application, being blissfully unaffected by others’ judgment of you — if you internalize the political crowd’s opinion.

I recommend “the position of f- you” over “imperturbability”, but I’m notoriously based.

As we conclude, I’m going to challenge your identity. This is the deepest cut. Ready?

You are not your stump speech. You know what I mean. That tapestry of anecdotes and humblebrags and pseudo-adversity tales you’ve intricately weaved over the years. You deliver it with feigned aw-shucks spontaneity at freshman legislator bus tours and Day 1 “quick introductions” and newsroom meetings and sometimes on the literal campaign stump.

Contrary to most self-help blather and inspiration porn, you are not “the sum of all your experiences” stored in your brain. Those memories of your past are faulty and filled with self-soothing lies you’ve told yourself for decades.

Here’s what’s true: You are not your elected office. You are not your legislative committee chairmanship, or your chief of staff status, or your new title at the lobbying shop. And you are not your botched bills, or the bumbling TV interview you wish you could do over, or that time you got ratioed on Twitter.

You are not your journalism portfolio. You are not Missouri Press Association awards or your “experienced multimedia journalist” résumé puffery. No more than you are your five-figure salary or your student loan debt or your typos or your denied Twitter blue-check application. 

No, you are not your stump speech. You are pure consciousness. Now, never the past. Your most valuable asset is your ability to make good decisions. You already made one, as you chose to read this long, this deep. You were gifted nine presents in #1-#18. Which ones will you choose to unwrap and explore? Of those, which will you adopt to make your own and master and share with the world?

This was about you. From the song linked in the Part 1 introduction all the way to this paragraph. From October 2001 to October 2021. And it’s been my pleasure. Every day for 20 years. See you tomorrow morning.

20 for 20, Part 1: The evolution of Missouri journalism and how you can benefit
20 for 20, Part 2: Two NEW profitable hustles for the 2022 and 2024 Missouri campaign cycles
20 for 20, Part 3: Casting call: Missouri politics is pro wrestling and needs a new top heel
20 for 20, Part 4: How to benefit from Missourians’ addictions to victimhood and smartphones

The post 20 for 20, Part 5: You Are Not Your Stump Speech appeared first on The Libertarian Republic.

For instance, the ingredients used by Hain Celestial Group, which sells baby food under the brand Earth’s Best Organic, were found to contain 352 ppb lead when the safe limit is only 5 ppb. Beech-Nut, which exited the baby food market in June 2021 after issuing a voluntary recall on its rice cereal, was discovered to allow products with over 900 ppb arsenic to go on the market when the safe limit is 10 ppb. In September 2021, a second congressional report was made public, stating that Hain Celestial Group had underestimated the levels of heavy metals in its baby food 100% of the time. The estimates were flagrantly wrong – the heavy metals level was 28% to 93% higher in its finished products.

What Action Has the FDA Taken to Tackle This Urgent Issue?

Shortly after the first congressional report was made public, the FDA developed the Closer to Zero plan, a four-step strategy meant to “reduce exposure to arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury from foods eaten by babies and young children to as low as possible.” However, the approach proposed by the Closer to Zero plan is quite problematic and ineffective, as it fails to solve the problem within a reasonable time. According to the agency, the plan would be finalized in 2024 or later, which is unacceptable since developing infants and toddlers need clean, non-toxic food.

The first two steps of the Closer to Zero plan, “evaluate the scientific basis for action levels” and “propose action levels,” can be skipped entirely, as the FDA should be aware that the safe limits for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury have already been set by the Baby Food Safety Act of 2021, a bill proposed by Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi. He also led the investigation of the Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy on baby food companies. The agency could jump straight to worthwhile action by skipping these unnecessary steps, namely evaluating the “achievability and feasibility of action levels.” 

This is paramount if the FDA wants to see concrete, tangible results from baby food companies throughout the United States. By making sure every baby food company in the country has access to the means needed to manufacture safe, nourishing products, such as sourcing rice from fields with soil low in arsenic and using food strains that are unlikely to absorb heavy metals, the agency would achieve the goal of the Closer to Zero plan. Still, the FDA’s strategy is loose. It has other shortcomings, too, such as failing to consider the cumulative impact of heavy metals on children’s neurodevelopment and not being completely transparent by posting testing data online as soon as they are available.

A Sliver of Hope for Parents of Infants and Toddlers Could Be the Baby Food Safety Act of 2021

Proposed on March 25, 2021, the Baby Food Safety Act was the idea of Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi. He decided to take the initiative and propose a solution to the severe issue of heavy metals lurking in most baby food on the American market, perhaps because he saw firsthand the utter disregard many companies have toward the wellbeing of children. If this bill enters law, it will immediately set maximum limits for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury in baby food. As a result, parents would have access to quality food for their children without waiting years for new regulations. But – wait! – there is more to it.

In addition to enforcing safe limits for the four dangerous heavy metals, the Baby Food Safety Act would also force the FDA to become more involved in monitoring the activity of baby food companies by periodically reviewing and, if necessary, further lowering the maximum limits for heavy metals. Furthermore, the new law would make it mandatory for facilities that handle infant and toddler food to have controls and plans to ensure that their products comply with the maximum limits on heavy metals. Finally, the Baby Food Safety Act would also expand the FDA’s authority to recall tainted or misbranded baby food.

Advice for Baby Food Manufacturers on How to Stay Ethical Until New Regulations Take Effect

The first step baby food companies that want to maintain their reputation as ethical, reliable businesses must take is to regularly test their raw ingredients and finished products for heavy metals. Having a sample tested costs between $50 and $100, but if the manufacturer signs a mutually beneficial agreement with a trustworthy laboratory, it will not spend a fortune on testing. If the baby food facility must comply with the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), it must implement the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) and set preventive controls. Recognized internationally, the HACCP system helps manufacturers ensure the safety of consumers by avoiding dangerous levels of contaminants in their products.

An excellent idea for baby food companies is to switch to a sustainable manufacturing approach. This will be a win-win situation, as producing sustainable baby food is associated with a lower operating cost, more profitable business, and improved share prices because up to 78% of consumers will purchase a product if it is eco-friendly, the chances of the business having a more significant revenue with each passing year increase tremendously. Baby food companies that connect with consumers by embracing sustainability relish higher profitability, and corporate plans that consider climate change and make efforts to minimize the environmental impact of the business earn an 18.7% higher return on investment (ROI).

Some of the most effective ways of becoming sustainable as a baby food company are paying attention to packaging and using as few as possible, sourcing ingredients from organic farmers, producing more vegan food, and selling dry food in bulk. Not only will switching to manufacturing baby food sustainably increase revenue and earn the business more loyal clients, but it will also eliminate the threat of heavy metals existing in the products in too high concentrations. Lastly, baby food companies that seek to remain ethical should have clear, honest labels, even if they use not-so-healthy ingredients, recall products immediately after receiving positive test results for heavy metals, and work with accredited, reliable, and competent people.

About the Author

Jonathan Sharp is Chief Financial Officer at Environmental Litigation Group, P.C., headquartered in Birmingham, Alabama. The law firm specializes in toxic exposure. The attorneys and their legal team aid parents whose children developed autism due to being fed toxic baby food, as autism is linked to exposure to heavy metals.

The post Acute Heavy Metal Issue in Baby Food Met with Sluggish Efforts by the FDA appeared first on The Libertarian Republic.

The post Biden Scraps Green Fuel Rules In Bid To Slow Skyrocketing Gas Prices appeared first on The Libertarian Republic.

Last December, Karyn Lewis and Megan Kuhfeld, two researchers at NWEA, a research organization, reported that student achievement at the start of the current school year was lower than for a typical year. There was a 3–7 percentage point decline in reading and a 9–11 percentage point decline in mathematics. That same month, education researchers Dan Goldhaber of the University of Washington, Thomas J. Kane of Harvard, and Andrew McEachin of NWEA plugged the Lewis/Kuhfeld data into a model to estimate how much those declines in learning would cause their lifetime income to decline. Their answer: $43,800. This number was broadly consistent with a separate study by McKinsey & Company that found an average lifetime earnings loss of between $49,000–$61,000 per student. Aggregated across all US K-12 students, these studies show more than $2 trillion in lost lifetime earnings for our youngest generation.

A recent report released by the World Bank paints a more dire picture. In that report, it estimates that the school closures could cause a loss of between 0.3 and 1.1 years of schooling, adjusted for quality. In its most pessimistic scenario, the World Bank estimates that worldwide cumulative losses could total between $16 and $20 trillion in present value terms.

A National Bureau of Economic Research study released in November 2021 analyzed recent test score data across 12 states in comparison to previous years and found passing rates declined by 14.2 percentage points on average in mathematics and 6.3 percentage points in English Language Arts. The authors found that much of the decline was due to the closing down of schools.

Historical evidence suggests that these learning losses are likely to be permanent. A 2019 article published in the Journal of Labor Economics analyzed the effect of teacher strikes in Argentina on students’ long-term outcomes in that country. The authors found that experiencing the average number of days of strikes during primary school reduced labor earnings of males and females by 3.2 percent and 1.9 percent, respectively.

In another study, researchers from the IZA Institute of Labor Economics analyzed long-term outcomes from one of the most extreme examples of learning disruptions – war. In that study, the authors compared Austrians and Germans who were 10 years old during World War II with their counterparts in neutral countries such as Switzerland and Sweden. The authors found that earning losses persisted into the 1980s. They estimated the earning losses to be about 0.8 percent of GDP.

Once these earning losses take hold, they lead to lower life expectancies. This connection was highlighted most prominently in a paper published in the Journal of the American Medical Association that analyzed data on school shutdowns early in the pandemic. The authors found that missed instruction in the United States could be associated with an estimated 13.8 million years of life lost.

What makes these outcomes even more tragic is that they were experienced by children who, as was known early on, never had a significant risk of dying from COVID-19. As of the first week of March 2022, out of the nearly 950,000 Covid-19 deaths, only 865 were children under the age of 18. That amounts to about 433 children annually. This is comparable to a bad flu season in the US. For example, the CDC estimates that the actual number of flu deaths for children in the 2017-18 flu season was about 600.

Moreover, the school closings and lockdowns have led to a noticeable loss in children’s mental health. This was apparent early in the pandemic. In a CDC report released in November 2020, researchers reported that the proportion of mental health-related visits from April to October 2020 for children aged 5-11 and 12-17 years had increased by approximately 24 percent and 31 percent, respectively in comparison to 2019 data. In a follow-up CDC report, researchers found that emergency department visits due to suspected suicide attempts were 51 percent higher among girls aged 12-17 years during early 2021 in comparison to the same period in 2019; among boys aged 12-17 years, suspected suicide attempt emergency department visits increased 4 percent.

In 2021, FAIR Health released a report that analyzed data from over 32 billion private health care claim records tracking data from 2019 and 2020. Claims for intentional self-harm as a percentage of all medical claims in the 13-18 age group were 90.7 percent higher early in the pandemic in 2020 than in the same time period in 2019. Furthermore, the authors noted, claims for generalized anxiety disorder increased by 93.6 percent over that same time.

Not much can be done about this now, other than to end the remaining restrictions on children. But there is a lesson for future pandemics: follow the science. If the data say that young people are at very low risk, then treat them as if they are at very low risk. Maybe we’re all in this together, as the propaganda goes, but we are not equally in this together. Treating children the way government officials did was morally wrong.

David R. Henderson

Ryan Sullivan

This article is republished with permission from the American Institute for Economic Research.

The post The Kids Aren’t Alright appeared first on The Libertarian Republic.

Businessman Arif Efendi shares his view on cryptocurrency and Sweden’s proposal to ban Bitcoin mining.
According to businessman Arif Efendi, cryptocurrency has come under fire in recent years. As a result, Sweden called on the EU to ban bitcoin mining, a development that has expanded globally.
However, he claims that cybercash still has lots of positive things to offer.

What is the hype about Cryptocurrency?

Even though cryptocurrency has been around for more than a decade, it is only in recent years that the term has become a household name.

Cryptocurrencies have often made headlines and recently became the talk of the town because Sweden wants the European Union (EU) to ban the mining of Bitcoins.

What is all this about, and what is cryptocurrency actually?

After many years of research and investments, these are questions I often meet. Let us dig into it together and explore the world of cryptocurrency.

What is cryptocurrency?

At its simplest, cryptocurrency is digital money. With cryptocurrency, there are no physical coins or paper notes. The money exists strictly in the form of data.

Furthermore, cryptocurrencies are types of digital currencies developed for usage on peer-to-peer networks devoid of central authority. The most widely known cryptocurrency is Bitcoin.

Bitcoins and other types of cybercash have elements of decentralization, as they operate without a central bank or single administrator.

The decentralized control is related to one more cryptocurrency characteristic, namely enhanced security and anonymity due to its use of cryptography.
Cryptocurrency has many benefits compared to traditional currency. For example, cryptocurrency cannot be counterfeited or debased due to the cryptographic protocols that support the currency’s existence.

In addition, cryptocurrency accounts cannot go “in the red” because cryptocurrency does not actually have an account balance from which a deficit could occur.

Finally, cryptocurrency allows for near-instantaneous transactions between different parties anywhere on Earth with a reasonable degree of trust.

How is cryptocurrency different from stocks?

Cryptocurrency is different from stocks in that cryptocurrency is a type of digital currency that uses cryptography to secure transactions.

Cryptocurrencies are completely decentralized, meaning they have no centralized banking system or authority controlling them. The cryptocurrency market typically involves cryptocurrency trading and investing.

The stock market is an exchange where brokers and dealers trade stocks. A stock represents an ownership interest in a company so it can be traded or sold at a profit based on the performance of the business.

Stock prices fluctuate every day due to supply and demand, overall health of the economy, perceived value by investors, potential for gains through company growth, etc.

However, cryptocurrency prices rarely vary more than 1-2% a day.

Why is cryptocurrency so popular?

Cryptocurrency is rapidly gaining popularity in today’s society. People are purchasing cryptocurrency because of the benefits it offers. Information about cryptocurrency has been around for years, but recently cryptocurrency has sparked interest, leading to more cryptocurrency purchases than ever before.

Cryptocurrency gives people complete control over their money rather than depending on banks or other financial institutions. As mentioned earlier, it is also decentralized, meaning no person, group or company owns them. The ability to be in charge of your own money is what draws many people, including myself, to cryptocurrency.

Why does Sweden want the EU to ban Bitcoin mining?

Despite its popularity, EU legislators are currently considering new legislation that would bar energy-intensive cryptocurrency mining from being carried out in countries across the union.

The legislation is being proposed due to cryptocurrency miners draining electricity supplies in Sweden to their own benefit. It has become a popular method of cryptocurrency mining in recent years.

When Bitcoin was introduced, it was mined on computers with normal processing units, but it quickly turned out that the process was way too slow. Therefore, cryptocurrency is now generated through big mining pools. These pools consume huge amounts of electricity, and this is what concerns the Swedes.

According to the writers of an open letter to the EU, Bitcoin mining in Sweden now consumes 1 TeraWatt-hour annually. The names of the writers are Björn Risinger, director of the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, and Erik Thedéen, director of the Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority

This is the same amount of electricity needed to provide 200,000 households with power. According to Björn Risinger and Erik Thedéen, cryptocurrency mining uses more and more of Sweden’s renewable energy.

“If we were to allow extensive mining of crypto-assets in Sweden, there is a risk that the renewable energy available to us will be insufficient to cover the required climate transition that we need to make,” the two Swedes wrote in their letter to the EU.

Björn Risinger and Erik Thedéen refer to Sweden’s climate obligations according to the 2015 Paris Agreement.

Coexistence between the climate and cryptocurrency

While cryptocurrency is more popular and talked about than ever before, it is still controversial, as you can hear.

I, myself, find great joy in cryptocurrency and its endless opportunities. I am sure it is here to stay and that it will create a lot more headlines in the future.

In the meantime, I hope we can find a way for the climate and cryptocurrency to coexist.

By Arif Efendi

Arif Efendi is a London-based businessman interested in cryptocurrency, investments, sports, and entertainment.

The post Arif Efendi: Why Cryptocurrency is Here to Stay appeared first on The Libertarian Republic.

When states or local governments pass minimum wage increases, they typically structure the laws so the increases phase in over several years, often starting on Jan 1. With 2022 officially underway, minimum wage increases will take effect in 25 states, 58 cities/counties, and Puerto Rico, according to a new report from the Employment Policies Institute (EPI), a fiscally-conservative think tank that generally opposes minimum wage hikes. 

California leads the way among state-wide minimum wages, with a $15/hour minimum wage now in effect for large employers. Washington similarly increased its wage to $14.49, followed by Massachusetts at $14.25, Connecticut at $14, Oregon at $13.50, New York at $13.20, New Jersey at $13, Arizona at $12.80, Maine at $12.75, and Colorado at $12.56. 

Some places are raising the minimum wage even more sharply at the local level. West Hollywood, California is leading the way in 2022, with a $17.64 minimum wage specifically for hotel employees. Emeryville, California is also enacting an estimated $17.64 minimum wage this year, while in Washington, SeaTac is implementing $17.54 and Seattle is requiring $17.27 among large employers. 

Next up are more California localities, with Berkeley and San Francisco implementing a $17.16 minimum wage, while Mountain View and Sunnyvale go for $17.10 and Palo Alto and Milpitas enact minimum wages of $16.45 and $16.43, respectively. 

At first glance, this might all sound like good news. After all, doesn’t everybody want higher wages? Yet the truth is these mandatory wage increases will hurt businesses and employees alike. As EPI’s report notes, these increases would harm the economy in the best of times. And we are not, in fact, living in the best of times. 

“We know the damage that sharply rising minimum wage mandates have caused prior to the pandemic,” EPI Managing Director Michael Saltsman said. “Now, despite the track record of past harm, minimum wage advocates are instead moving the goal posts without assessing the extent of losses created by minimum wage hikes despite the hardship of the last two years.”

While some workers will see their wages go up as a result of these increases, many others will lose their jobs entirely or have their hours reduced and see a net reduction in earnings. Why? Well, because the real minimum wage is always zero: unemployment. 

“Making it illegal to pay less than a given amount does not make a worker’s productivity worth that amount—and, if it is not, that worker is unlikely to be employed,” famed free-market economist Thomas Sowell explained. “Unfortunately, the real minimum wage is always zero, regardless of the laws, and that is the wage that many workers receive in the wake of the creation or escalation of a government-mandated minimum wage, because they either lose their jobs or fail to find jobs when they enter the labor force.”

Minimum wage increases can eliminate millions of jobs and lead to lower overall compensation, but that’s not it. Studies have also shown that mandatory wage hikes can lead to higher prices for food and childcare, more than negating any benefit.  

Of course, many of the minimum wage increases taking effect across the country are gradual. But their consequences are still very real—and they’ll still be felt by families already struggling with crippling inflation and a faltering recovery. 

WATCH: AOC’s 5 Worst Economics EPIC FAILS (Reaction)

This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.

Image: Employment Policies Institute

The post 84 Places in America are Raising Their Minimum Wages for 2022 appeared first on The Libertarian Republic.

The post Here’s What Would Actually Happen If Roe Is Overturned appeared first on The Libertarian Republic.

Kendall Tietz on November 24, 2021

• Fort Worth Independent School District (FWISD) is reportedly infusing Critical Race Theory (CRT) into its teacher training, which says “America is oppressive” and that “White supremacy is everywhere,” Carlos Turcios, an activist who spent four years on FWISD’s Racial Equity Committee and now organizes parent protests, told Fox News.
• The school district has asserted it does not teach CRT, but it advertised a class for teachers and staff that introduced CRT into the curriculum, according to the “Overview of Service Provided by the Division of Equity & Excellence,” from September 2020. The overview outlines “Critical Race Theory (CRT) in Fort Worth ISD: An Introduction.”
• The overview explains CRT’s central tenets as “Counter- storytelling, the permanence of racism, whiteness as property, interest convergence, critique of liberalism,” to discuss the “endemic nature of racism and white supremacy” in the U.S. from its founding “into the present.”

Teacher training at a Texas public school district teaches the tenets of Critical Race Theory, according to a document obtained by Fox News and videos provided by an education activist.

Fort Worth Independent School District (FWISD) is reportedly infusing Critical Race Theory (CRT) into its teacher training, which states that “America is oppressive” and “White supremacy is everywhere,” Carlos Turcios, an activist who spent four years on FWISD’s Racial Equity Committee and now organizes parent protests, toldFox News.

CRT holds that America is fundamentally racist, yet it teaches people to view every social interaction and person in terms of race. Its adherents pursue “antiracism” through the end of merit, objective truth and the adoption of race-based policies.

The school district has asserted that it does not teach CRT, but it advertised a class for teachers and staff that introduced CRT into the curriculum, according to the “Overview of Service Provided by the Division of Equity & Excellence,” from September 2020. The overview outlines “Critical Race Theory (CRT) in Fort Worth ISD: An Introduction.”

The overview explains CRT’s central tenets as “Counter- storytelling, the permanence of racism, whiteness as property, interest convergence, critique of liberalism,” to discuss the “endemic nature of racism and white supremacy” in the U.S. from its founding “into the present.”

The course is self-paced, where participants learn that racism “is prevalent in all aspects of our society,” including the educational system. The “culminating activity” of the course involves participants developing “their own Racial Equity Strategic Plan to move more deeply into critical self-reflection and work towards implementing their plan into the participants current roles.”

“The superintendent and the bureaucracy are doing a disservice to the students by teaching them that color is everything, that America is oppressive, and that White supremacy is everywhere,” Turcios told Fox News. “Last time I checked, critical race theory doesn’t help kids learn how to pay the bills, pay their taxes, or pass that job interview.”

The school district’s overview also discusses “Students Organized for Anti-Racism (SOAR),” implemented to encourage students to do “anti-racism” work. The SOAR description says students in “predominantly White settings” should be “particularly open to alliances with students of color” and “not further isolate students of color, who are already historically marginalized and hypervisible within the system.”

SOAR advisers, the faculty members guiding the groups, should be “prepared to host racial affinity spaces as needed,” which involves segregating participants by skin color, according to the district’s overview. Advisers should also “be able to practice culturally responsive teaching” and “have an internalized understanding of critical race theory,” the document says.

At an optional district “Racial Equity Summit,” in March 2019, attendees had to divide themselves by race into “African, Biracial, African American/Black, Hispanic/Latinx, American Indian, Asian and White” groups, according to a videoshared by Turcios.

At the district’s school board meeting in November, FWISD Superintendent Kent Paredes Scribner discussed the “Introduction to Critical Race Theory” and “how to create an anti-racist classroom” by addressing implicit bias and microaggressions.

At the 2020 FWISD “Racial Equity Summit,” an instructor discussed a quote, “a little white man deep inside all of us,” attributed to James Baldwin, on a slide titled “Internalized white supremacy.”

During the session, the black speaker said many black people are “guilty of” hosting “internalized white supremacy” by thinking “our own traditions are not as good, somehow,” which is “internalized racism, because we internally believe that white is supreme.” She also said, “it requires a constant process of ridding ourselves of this colonized mentality.”

Turcios told Fox News that Scribner should resign, along with several other school district leaders who allegedly created a “toxic environment.”

On Nov. 9, at a FWISD school board meeting, a pro-CRT parent, Malikk Austin, told attendees that he has 1,000 soldiers “locked and loaded” for those who “dare” question the need for race-based curricula.

“Look at the word racism, this is something deliberately done to people of African descent to shackle us down, this hate, fear mongering ain’t gonna work no more,” Austin said. “It’s over with, we are not our ancestors. I got over 1,000 soldiers ready to go.”

When reached for comment, FWISD told the Daily Caller News Foundation that its offices would be closed until Nov. 29.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact

licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

The post Texas School District’s CRT Course For Teachers Purports ‘American Is Oppressive,’ ‘White Supremacy Is Everywhere’ appeared first on The Libertarian Republic.