NBA IN SEASON TOURNAMENT KNOCKOUT ROUND PREVIEW

Playoffs?

Another update on the NBA In Season Tournament. Stay tuned for the last video after the winner is decided.

Check out my social media page, thanks for watching.

Managing the Pandemic: Voluntary Society

Taking a little break from other series which you can see the last part here. I’ve been thinking about writing a post about this topic for awhile. I know that everyone can relate to this post because we’re all going through it at the moment. I believe some people are probably experiencing less dramatic situations than others. The current event, a pandemic of proportions not unseen in history, has created a lot of government power grabbing. You may or may not know someone who has this virus or who has succumb to it. The inevitably of people dying is not something that humans can remedy. So this post will not focus on finding the cure or anything like that.

First, I feel like I should thank any front line nurses, clinical laboratory scientists, doctors, truck drivers, grocery store clerks and many others who must put their lives at risk. From my own perspective, I do know people with the virus. I do live in NYC  and it does have the most infections. Personally I don’t have it, nor does anyone close to me. I have a distinct point of view because my wife and mother in law are both front-liners. I drive them to work in Brooklyn nearly everyday. Often times, they tell me its been a pretty constant 50 percent rate of positives. They are clinical laboratory scientists, their job is to quite literally run the Covid-19 test. They have to deal with live samples of it in the thousands each day. Words really don’t do their efforts justice because they work 6-7 days a week for usually 12 hours a day. Not an easy gig.

Bad Government Handling

Many people feel underwhelmed by the government’s response to this pandemic. Others feel overwhelmed by it. I think the handling has varied depending on the place. Some governments have handled it better than others. But overall, I’d say that generally government does a bad job at handling stuff like this. The reason is because they try to apply policies that may or may not be effective to everywhere. The problem with blanket solutions is that sometimes that blanket doesn’t cover every situation. Take for example, in New York State, there are two distinct areas of New York State: Upstate and Down State. Upstate New York is mostly rural with lower population density. Down State contains New York City, a city inhabited by 8.6 million people with the highest population density in the USA. (Its ranked 8th in the world for population density of city proper) The State government in the beginning just spit out general regulations that were probably fine for upstate but in the city it wasn’t going to be enough.

I don’t think its a stretch to say that population density is a big factor in how fast this virus spreads. So its clear that here in the city, we would have need to be stricter on “social distancing” due to the close proximity of literally everyone. Especially baffling is the failure of the city to identify that public transit like subways are a hot bed for spreading. It took nearly a week or two before they decided it was a good idea to actually sanitize the train cars. (FYI they usually don’t clean subway cars in NYC, ever) In addition to all this, we’ve seen government bailouts which creates other problems that is probably entirely different post. However, I will address the mass unemployment.

Personal Responsibility

The goal of this post is to see how a voluntary society would handle such a pandemic. Let’s say that government didn’t exist. I think there are immediate changes that right off the bat would make a difference. First, without government there wouldn’t be shortages of medical equipment or hand sanitizer because there would be no restrictions on the production and release of those products to market. Second, without government there would be no food shortages, because the price of food goods would adjust to market value. While price gouging might seem unfair, its actually a protection for the supplier of that good. When the government tries to keep prices down artificially, it hurts the suppliers. It also hurts consumers because rather than having that good, its just sold out completely. Its better to have it especially in the case of something like bread, milk or eggs for a higher price. Instead with price gouging protections, we see high demand items sold out. Its because the producer or supplier can’t afford to make more, it makes no sense to put more out if they can’t get full market price. Its a loss for them.

I think the less obvious yet more important difference in a voluntary society would be how people and businesses go about protecting themselves. The main tool they would use would be personal responsibility. Remember there is no government to tell anyone what they should do or shouldn’t do. So it would be up to each individual to decide what is best. I know a majority will immediate disagree with me here by arguing that “nobody listens to government rules, what makes you think people will just naturally be responsible?” Sure its true that people don’t listen to government rules. However, the mindset of voluntary society is vastly different to compared to our current society. In a voluntary society, people aren’t complacent, they would be used to relying on themselves rather than on government for everything. But in order to answer these questions, we need to dig deeper into what personal responsibility actually looks like.

The personally responsible person would ideally take precautions, first and foremost for himself or herself.  This person would use common sense methods to prevent themselves from contracting any virus. Things like washing your hands, limiting public interactions, and generally just keeping themselves healthy. Now think about it: Keeping yourself healthy has additional benefits to society because if you aren’t sick then you can’t possibly spread the sickness. The same goes for businesses. A business can figure out how to operate without shutting down completely. We live in a world with technology beyond imagination. Surely nobody can tell me that technology can’t fix the government policy of total shutdown. Of course, before any business can innovate a way forward, the government steps in and subjectively rules between essential and non essential. In a voluntary society, businesses would only shut down if they absolutely had to. Technology would be able to cover gaps. I think in 2020, we have no excuses.

Let me also address something that media seems to find quite interesting: “No Libertarians in a pandemic”. Okay, first of all, excuse me but if you lose your principles on any basis like “an emergency” then you weren’t a REAL libertarian in the first place. Second, actual Libertarians and Anarchists don’t call on the government to do literally anything except shut itself down. Third, if your a libertarian or anarchist, and you think its rebellious to unsafely break “social distancing rules” then you are a part of problem. Listen, I’m not saying you should follow government guidelines because the government said so. I’m saying you should take some PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. It doesn’t matter what anyone says. Keep yourself healthy and keep others healthy too!

Conclusion

Last thing, I know that even in a voluntary society there would massive layoffs. A lot of business requires face to face interactions. Whatever technology can’t remedy, unfortunately some people would lose work. I have imagined that without government there would be a solution to this problem. Since without government, there would be no welfare state. Instead I think unemployment insurance would exist. It could be a multiple company, multi-trillion dollar business too. An unemployment insurance company needs to have very deep pockets to start or a large customer base. Either way it would work quite similarly to welfare.

In normal times, you would sign up by paying an upfront fee probably anywhere from 50 to 150 dollars. This fee would go straight to the company. Then on an app from your phone you would be able to set the amount deducted automatically from your paycheck. It would have to be in percentages with the lowest being probably 10-20 percent. That money deducted would be built up over the months and years that you work at any given job. A percentage deduction also means that the more money you make, more money you’ll receive if you do lose your job. Keep in mind that taxes wouldn’t exist so just imagine you get to choose how much is taken out. I would also think that a cool feature could be a retirement option. Let’s say you work 40 years without ever having to use this unemployment insurance. You could opt it into a 401k or IRA for retirement since you obviously put in the money and should be able to take it out eventually.

The moral of this post is that personal responsibility can be used in both a voluntary society and in today’s world. If you protect yourself then you will protect those around you too. Stay safe out there.

Thanks for reading!

Check the Social Media!

 

 

 

Legalized Baby Murder: New York State

Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, ‘What are you doing for others?’ -Martin Luther King Jr. 

Perhaps you haven’t heard yet, but New York State has passed a law. Nothing new here, New York passes TOO MANY laws. However, this law is a bit different because it really oversteps a boundary not yet broken by any law in any place in the United States. I am a self proclaimed Anarchist and I usually despise laws of all natures. But this law actually makes me wish the government would just fuck right off. New York State passed an abortion law. Yep. This abortion law goes farther than ever. Here are just two articles, both from “liberal” sources: CNN and USA TODAY. A quick google search will bring a ton of articles many connected with the Catholic church. I am a Catholic too, but for me this is a political matter not a religious one. Therefore you won’t see me invoking God as an argument against this. Granted, I believe that religious leaders do hold the moral high ground in this case. (Say what you will about their scandals)

My position on abortion has evolved throughout the years. When I first started to care about politics I was originally pro-choice. The 14th amendment protects this right to choose. Then in college I realized that my stance was solid but the whole abortion argument was total bullshit. The sides are arguing different things. How can anyone win argument about different things? Pro-choice people believe the mother has the right to choose and life begins later in the second trimester and Pro-Life believe that life begins at conception. Two completely different trains of thought. To be fair, both have valid points so I decided to combine them. Life does begin at conception because the sperm and egg are both living cells that grow and multiply when they come together. The right to choose is not just in the constitution but its inherent. Humans have autonomy and we should be allowed to use it. Then I added one more facet to my beliefs: adoption. You can read my post on that here. So, I am pro-adoption because I believe women can choose and believe that the baby deserves to live.

Here is something kind of humorous, a joke if you will, Governor Andrew Cuomo of NY is a catholic. Yep. This baby murderer is a Catholic man. Politics sure does pay good when you decide that your religious beliefs can just be ignored. But this isn’t even my problem with this law. I know that Cuomo is a piece of shit. He’s running NY into the ground and we just keep voting him in. In his latest move, he has decided to make up for the lower murder rate in NYC by upping the infant death rate.

Yes, the law specifies very specific circumstances for when the new legal late term abortion can done. But it also decriminalizes abortions done by basically anyone with a medical background in the right situation. Yes, I will admit that there are a few VERY rare cases where abortion is necessary. However, I feel like this doesn’t occur often enough to justify a whole law. All this law really does, is further the right to abortion by anyone. I’m scared to even ask when its going next? Legalized coat hanger abortions?  Let’s be honest where is the fucking line here?

Honestly, I think that abortion should phased out for adoption. I don’t see why leftists need to murder as many babies as necessary. I’ve used this argument before, but I think there is enough demand for babies by parents who can’t have kids. The problem with adoption right now is that its expensive and run by the state. If we make adoption more streamlined and less expensive, I think it could be viable replacement for abortions.

Before I go on rant about encroaching leftist government power, I want to end this post here by explaining the quote that I put at the top.

Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, ‘What are you doing for others?’ -Martin Luther King Jr. 

I choose this quote because Martin Luther King Jr. never disappoints and his quotes are so deep its insane. But this one really asks a great and relevant question. I think this abortion does very little for others. Women already had the right to choose here in New York. But if someone would like to tell me what the law does for those babies that it kills? I’m willing to guess that this law is going to kill more babies than women whose lives its supposed to save. King’s quote is also the quintessential anarchist/ voluntarism mantra. You have to help others and live your life to the best of ability. It just makes the most sense. We can’t keep letting government legalize baby murder. Law has no morals, just remember that because its legal doesn’t mean its moral.

Thank you for reading!

Social Media: Minds gpslife12

Facebook: Garrett’s Life Experience’s Blog

NYC MTA: Transportation Off the Rails

New York City is home to nearly 8.6 million people. The largest city in the United States. If you have ever been to NYC then maybe you have experience the wonder that is the subway. As a lifetime New Yorker, I can say that the subways are horrendous. Its dirty, slow, frustrating, stressful, and many more colorful words. I’ve only been living in NYC for 3 years, my experience has been that subways are getting worse. I’ve talked to other people who have lived here for longer and say that in the past 4 or 5 years they have seen a dramatic drop-off in subway service. I want to say that I’m no expert in transportation or subway systems. However, the problems with MTA start with the management and go all way down to the actual rails themselves.

In this post, I will offer up a solution to the problems occurring with the subway system. I will also offer a possible solution to the management of the MTA, particularly its budgeting and structure. I don’t have a fancy name for my plan or anything. I’ve also never put into words on a screen or paper. So here goes nothing:

For reference, I will be using the MTA’s own budget calculations. (Click here) These the official numbers of the operational budget. Other than that, I have to assume a few things because its hard to know without a survey of actual repairs how much its going to cost. I want to start with the physical repairs that I would have done.

The replacement of all lines with brand new track:

The most obvious change I would make is the replacement of all current track with a new modern track system. Now I have no idea of the costs or even the type of system best suited. However, I believe that updating the tracks that were technologically superior in the year 1900 is an important step to improvement. I also realize that this is the most costly and ambitious portion of my plan.

The new tracks would eliminate the delays cause by signal failures, derailments, and power losses. It is purely an infrastructure project because it keeps the mechanical malfunctions to a minimum.  As for a time frame, my thinking takes into consideration the impact of taking subways off-line, the budget restrictions, and the ability to get it done within the time constraints. There are 25 subway lines. I would take two lines that would cause the least stress on the system if taken offline. Imagine 2 lines go offline, the company or companies putting in the track would have a maximum of 2 years to get the job done. Now I could be wrong about the time frame to get it done however, adjustments can be made. In my theoretical situation, it would be a 13 year project approximately. I’ll be honest, they can take off my 5 line first, no problem with me.

This leads to a problem, of course. The problem being how will the people that get stranded by their subway line being re-done get around? Its not simple but the city recently bought new buses. So those older buses will be pressed into service to replace the subway line. I would have the buses follow the schedule and locations as the subway did. The times would have to be adjusted for travel distance. Its only temporary and its better than nothing.

Budgeting the Repairs: 

We have to assume that the repairs and track replacement is going to be very expensive. I want to say its probably going to cost over a billion dollars. However, I think there is some reasonable ways to raise that money without bankrupting: New York State, New York City, Citizens.  The MTA had a total operating revenue of 8,608 million dollars in 2016. The MTA had total operating expenses of 9,238 million dollars in 2016. If you do some quick maths that means a deficit of 630 million dollars. Obviously, its going to be impossible to completely fund this ambitious plan without creating more debt. But consider that by 2021, the MTA will have 1,955 million dollars of deficit by 2021. (Page 16) The MTA is already going under. Here are 4 steps to help fix some of problems.

Replacement Funds/Repairs: “Adopt a Subway”

The MTA currently spends 1,618 million dollars on the repairs, maintenance and related supplies. (Page 16) We have to assume that a new track replacement will add double or triple the amount. So we have options. We could raise taxes or steal money from other programs. But I feel that the best solution is a combination of charity and advertisement. Lets begin with advertisement. My idea is that each of the 25 lines of subways would auctioned off for baseline amount. Ideally the total amount would equal the approximate cost of the replacement. Let’s say that for a company OR person to adopt a subway, they have to donate a minimum of 20 million dollars. What do they get for that 20 million? They would get exclusive advertisements in subway cars. Exclusive meaning that no other company would be allow to advertise unless they allow it. They would get naming rights. They would get corporate perks for employees who ride the subway. For example, if let’s say Citi Bank wanted to adopt the 7 line, they might bid 40 million because of other bidders. The 7 line would be re-named The Citi Bank 7 Line.

I said that people could also adopt a subway line. That is called charity because they willingly giving their money for the improvement of society. It would work differently in that advertisements would be sold traditionally by MTA standards. However, that person would have the subway line named after them. It would work the same way in an auction, with a minimum donation. I believe this is the most viable and least intrusive form of raising money to pay for my expensive track replacement.

One last thing to note would be that the company or person would have the option to either re-up each year or opt-out. Now if they opt-out then it would be put up for auction again.

Transition from Public to Half Public/Private MTA

The MTA has been a victim, similar to social security of being stolen from by government. The MTA is a New York State owned, federally funded operation. The Governor has more say than the Mayor of NYC. Which leads to a lot of political infighting, given that both are democrats. One of my solutions involves changing the structure of the MTA. The budget problems will be somewhat alleviated with the continuation of the “adopt a subway” initiative. However, we have to go further. On page 16, the total labor expenses for 2018 was 9,238 million dollars. This means that employees are costing MTA a lot of money. In any business, the employees will be the costliest item. However, we don’t want cut employees just make them more productive.

The MTA has a board of trustees which has a CEO. I would take this board of trustees and make it a non-profit government contractor. The mid level management and lower level employees would remain public. Eventually, the new profits from a more efficient and cost effective subway system would help create a trust that would pay the board. The trust would essentially invest the money to the point where it could maintain itself. Once the trust can payout the salaries and benefits to the board, it would be cut off from the MTA profits.

As for the public employees, I wouldn’t change too much. The only change that might occur would be less need for maintenance because the system won’t need as intense care. This could mean a switch from full time maintenance into temporary. However, heavy use will mean the need for maintenance will still be quite strong.

Metrocard Fares

Depending on the “adopt a subway” success, the fares would stay at the $2.75 mark until significant progress is made. I would say that its fair to increase prices. In my personal view if a train typically takes an hour to get from point A to point B for 2.75, then if that same train took 30 minutes, I would be more than okay with an increase. The fare revenue for 2016 was 6,050 million dollars. I think the first increase would come in about year 7 of the project. Here is a chart of the increases and the revenue gained:

Year:   Fare:   Increase:   Revenue added:

7           4.25       1.50        263,550 million dollars

10         5.00        0.75       131,775 million dollars

13          8.00      3.00       527,100 million dollars

*All figures are in dollars and cents, its a 13 year project*

These figures are based numbers of ridership (1.757 billion) from 2016 and a fare of 2.75 at the base. The fares would increase by an overall of 5.25 dollars. I think this is more than fair given that a new modern track subway would increase efficiency and effectiveness. I think that benefits to businesses would be substantial. The amount of tardiness due to bad transit is ridiculous. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been late due to a subway problem. I’m sure other New Yorkers have similar horror stories.

“Adopt A Station” – Give back to your community!

To piggy back on my previous idea of “adopt a subway”, I would also install the same thing for subway stations. Again if you have ever experienced a subway station, you know its just rats, homeless people and piss. Its horrible. Now stations would relatively cheaper. The money would be split into two purposes, paying the workers who clean and operate the booth. The second portion would go towards the MTA’s overall budget. If a company adopts a station, they would get exclusive advertisement rights, naming rights and some input on renovation design (If work is needed to be done). Of course, this is all optional and some MTA advertising money would be used to push a “give back to your community” twist.

Conclusion: 

I believe that my 13 year track replacement in combination with my “adopt a subway” and “adopt a station” initiatives would revitalize the MTA and the subway system. It would forever change how the subway is run. I think that separating the management (Board) from the public sector would help because politics gets very messy. I think the increase profits from the investment in the new track could actually make the MTA break even. With some help from companies and generous individuals it might even have surplus. The surplus (if it happens) would be used to improve the train cars, upgrade them.

I think that most New Yorkers are tired of the politics that keep the MTA from doing its job in running an effective and efficient subway system is the driving force behind my idea. You would have to be delusional to not see the problems with the current system. If you like my plan or if you have improvements I could make then feel free to let me know. If enough people get behind it, I would think sharing with the necessary people to start getting into action.

Thanks for reading!

Have an amazing day!

Twitter: gpslife12

Facebook: Garrett’s Life Experience’s Blog

Feel free to contact me!

Beating A Dead Horse: Fallacy of Minimum Wage and Rise of Welfare

The topic of minimum wage seems to really boil my blood. I write about it constantly. I don’t know if I can link all the posts its in without making a paragraph of it. In this post, I want to reiterate some of my usual arguments about minimum wage. However, I want to connect two things that are eerily related. Many people who think that McDonald’s and other workers of low skill level jobs need a living wage are the same people who say welfare is necessary because of the low wages. The liberal mission of a living wage is a misguided pipe-dream. The conservative theory that cutting all welfare at once is a solution that also will not work. Ever since the mid 1960s, the United States has been nothing short of obsessed with welfare and minimum wage. We depend it, like a cigarette addict who depends on cigarettes for nicotine. You can try to quit cold turkey or you can say fuck it and smoke more cigarettes because why quit when you’ve already damaged your lungs. I want to present something similar to what the e-cigarette has done for smokers. A new innovative way for the United States to free itself from this trap of living wages and welfare.

Recently, I came across these articles claiming that Minnesota had fix their state economy while Kansas had wrecked it. Minnesota elected a new democratic governor who raised taxes and increased minimum wage and saw a positive effect on the economy. Meanwhile in Kansas, they elected a tea party candidate. The governor of Kansas proceeded to cut four government departments and Medicaid. He cut the department of education and others. He lowered taxes for the rich. Kansas nearly went bankrupt.  It’s interesting that the total population of Kansas and Minnesota is about 7 or 8 million people. Kings County or otherwise known as Brooklyn has 2.6 million people, about same number of people as Kansas. New York City has a total of 8.6 million people as much both of those states combined. Just for some scale. I think when you look at tax plans and government philosophies, you can’t just look at results like “Oh the democratic way is definitely better because of Minnesota and the conservative technique sucks because look at Kansas!”

I believe that you have to take into account how many people are in the state and the unique-ness of that state. Kansas and Minnesota have completely different populations. They have different income per capita. They are in different geographic locations. Now I think that there are flaws with both GOP and Liberal ways of taxation and spending. As a libertarian, I can appreciate what the Kansas governor was trying to do. But he was too hasty, and didn’t have clear alternative that actually worked. I think the flaws with liberal system really tell you all about why minimum wage doesn’t work. The first flaw is that minimum wage can’t possibly help the worker as they claim it will. You have to realize that a minimum or base wage means it’s the least any worker can make. When you raise the base wage that means you raise the production costs of every company in the country, state or county. It affects all businesses. Businesses don’t just pay out wages. They have to pay taxes, regulatory fees, stock, transportation, supplies, retirement. Its bad enough that workers wages already take up to 50 or 60 percent of the profits in most businesses.

The worst effect of rasing minimum wage is felt by small business or franchised businesses. I have worked in franchised businesses for about 6 years now. A franchised is a separately owned business that pays to have the corporations name on it. The corporation sets the rules and standards and the franchisee is responsible for turning a profit. When you raise minimum wage you really hurt any small business or franchisee. I can personally tell you that at some McDonald’s they don’t even make a million dollars in a year. The one I worked at, only made about 500,000 in profit. Minimum wage is a small business killer, it’s not fair. Big corporations don’t care if you raise the minimum wage because they can take it. They are multinational corporations that make millions worldwide. You may say ok but low wages means we need more welfare right?  What we need is to keep the government out of the price setting business. Minimum wage increases the costs of everything. A lower wage would go further because production cost are lower. That is why other countries take our businesses, you can pay their workers less.

I’ll admit that we need some type of welfare. We cannot just cut medicare and Medicaid. We can’t just collapse social security. We need to help anyone who can’t work because of a mental or physical condition. We need to help people save for retirement. We need to support to the unemployed. The question is how to do all that without raising our debt even more. Currently, the welfare system in the United States cost about 700 billion dollars each year. This 700 billion on the taxpayer’s dime, aka you and me. It’s a complex and complicated system with multiple government agencies. The bureaucracy is ridiculous. I have written about basic income before and I strongly recommending read it. In that post about Basic Income, I propose a simple solution to the problem of welfare. Although it may not be as simple as I explain it. My central argument is that if 700 billion is spent on welfare each year then we install a basic income of about 2000 dollars to each resident over 18. The cost is about 500 billion for a basic income. We then replace our current welfare system with this basic income. Obviously there are kinks and certain regulations that would necessary especially when it comes to the unemployed and taxation. In my estimation, I believe that we could save 200 billion a year.

Here is my original post:

Basic Income: $2000

Population over 18: 244 million

Monthly cost of Basic Income: $488,000,000,000 billion

Monthly cost of welfare: 700 Billion

Savings by Government:$212,000,000,000 Billion dollars.

My point is that minimum wage doesn’t pull anybody out of poverty and neither does welfare. However, it is necessary to have both because we are a first world country. I believe that our government just doesn’t run anything that efficiently. I think that a ton of money is wasted on government programs that could be done by the private sector. I also believe that basic income is the solution between tea party economics and a full-fledged socialist economy. In beginning I used the analogy of a smoker trying to quit. I believe if keep minimum wage reasonably low, and we install basic income to replace our current welfare system, the United States could start to fix the other problems that plague our nation. I think that both parties and libertarians can get behind this idea. For liberals, it maintains the idea that people should be helped by the government and it would be taxpayer money paying for basic income.  For conservatives and libertarians, it keeps the government reach out of people’s lives. It eliminates a large of chunk of government-run services. It also could help bring our national debt down or pay for other projects.

I hope that this was an informative and though provoking piece. Feel free to research anything I have said. I won’t say that I was right about everything and I left out exact details. However, I think my argument is a viable one that should be considered by everyone.

Thank you for reading!