«

»

Aug 12

15th Issue New Voice For Politics

15th Issue New Voice For Politics

In this Issue

Put Your Hands in the Air and Step Away From the Shampoo It is time to rinse the impurities out of the shampoo industry

The Government is Going to Pump You Up  Government helping to raise unemployment and gas prices in Somerset Kentucky

End Illegal Immigration by Ending Welfare and Legalizing Drugs Combining liberal and conservatives proposals to fix the United States’ broken borders

shady shampoo

Put Your Hands in the Air and Step Away From the Shampoo

By Progressive Pete

Do you wash your own hair? Unless you are 16 years-old, completed the required classes, had “300 hours in the practice and theory of natural hair styling at a school of cosmetology,” and passed the written and practical examination it is illegal for you to wash hair. If you have not jumped through all of these hoops, a person could be arrested in Tennessee for illegal hair washing. In my opinion, this is a great and much needed law, because if a person has not had 300 hours of experience in the “theory of natural hair styling,” who knows what horrors might happen.

All I am saying is shampooing is dangerous. Those who have had shampoo in their eyes know exactly what I am talking about. This is no laughing matter. A bad haircut could ruin one’s life. Hair washing is the basis of the haircut. If the conditioning is off, everything else falls flat.

Hair cleansing clearly needs to be regulated. Only licensed people should be allowed to wash hair. If unlicensed people are allowed to wash hair, can you imagine the destruction that would ensue? Many people will argue that countless individuals have been washing hair for centuries without a license, but is that any reason to let the madness continue?

If we let anyone wash their own hair and the hair of others, where does it stop? Do we allow individuals with doctoral degrees in psychology to provide therapy to individuals with depression? Do we permit individuals who graduated from accredited medical schools to conduct surgery? Will we allow competent people to provide a service to those who are in need?

To be safe, we should make everyone apply for a license and pay a fee before they are allowed to do anything. Before a person shoots a gun, they should be licensed. Before a person cooks a meal, they should be licensed. Before someone makes a cup of coffee, they should be licensed. It is not unreasonable to demand that a customer should never be exposed to any risk in their life. From the womb to the tomb, people should never experience any discomfort.

Others will argue that licenses are simply a way to prevent competition in the market. They will contend that requiring a person to complete 300 hours in the “theory of natural hair styling” is simply a ruse to prevent competition in the hair washing industry. Some will even go as far as to suggest that a medical doctor does not need a license. These mad men will state if a person can pass all of the classes, complete the thousands of hours of practical experience, and all of the other requirements of medical school, these graduates know what they are doing. After all, how is it possible for a person to jump through all of the hoops of graduate school and have no idea what they are doing? These insane people believe the licensing system is simply there to provide customers with a false sense of security and a means to extort additional cash out of professionals who are simply trying to do their job and help others.

I will concede that a person with a doctoral degree most likely does not need a license, but I refuse to believe a person knows how to wash hair without at least “300 hours of experience in the theory of natural hair styling.” Some things are simply too risky to leave to chance.

 

two gas pumps
The Government is Going to Pump You Up

J. A. Gedra

The citizens of Somerset Kentucky now have the opportunity to tell their Mayor to fill her up. According to news reports, “the city is purchasing fuel from a local refinery and pricing it 15 to 20 cents below what commercial stations are charging.” This sounds like a great idea, but should the citizens of Somerset be pumped up about their new government gas pumping station?

Like most government interventions into the business market, there will be a big benefit at the front end followed by weeping and the gnashing of teeth at the end. Initially, gas prices will drop as the city government offers gas at cutthroat prices. In order to retain their customers, all of the non-government gas stations will have to follow suit and drop their prices. This will result in everyone paying lower gas prices and the citizens will rejoice in triumph over the greedy gas gouging station owners.

Unfortunately when the government intervenes, the benefits are soon followed by the unintended consequences of their actions. Traditionally, privately owned gas stations’ profit margins range from 1 to 3% of sales. When gas costs $4 per gallon, the gas station’s profit is somewhere between 4 to 12 cents per gallon. If gas stations are forced by the city of Somerset to cut their cost by 15 to 20 cents, the gas stations would be losing money on every sale of gasoline. Overtime, this continued loss in revenue would eventually lead to all of the gas stations in Somerset going out of business. This would result in the gas company employees losing their jobs, and the city losing tax revenue from the companies going out of business.

The loss of all of the gas stations in town will force all of the Somerset citizens to purchase gas at the City Monopoly gas pump. Since the city is running the only gas pump in town, it will only be a matter of time before this government program, like almost all government programs, starts to go over budget. The city will also need to make up the lost taxes they are no longer receiving from all of the gas stations they drove out of town with their predatory pricing. At this point, the city will do what almost all government created monopolies do; they will increase their prices to make up for the lost tax dollars. Eventually, the city politicians will realize they could pay for their new pet projects by increasing the gas price just a little more. Once this starts, the price of gas will continue to increase until it matches or exceeds the price that people were paying before the government went into the gas market.

Government entering the private market with their own gas station is not the solution, but there are things the government could do to lower the cost of gas. The government could begin by lowering gas taxes; on average, 13% of the cost of gasoline is due to taxes. The city could also lower other taxes to decrease the cost of business for gas stations: such as, income, sales, payroll, property, electricity, water, and sewage taxes. Government could also reduce the regulations against small businesses, since every regulation adds to the cost of doing business. If government could decrease the tax and regulation burdens, gas stations could lower the cost of gas. A government takeover of an entire industry is not necessary to reduce the cost of gas. Less government, not more, is the solution.

 

End Illegal Immigration by Ending Welfare and Legalizing Drugs

By Aimee Thompson

At this moment, millions of Central American children are illegally entering the United States. There are not enough resources to care for them; as a result, they are living in horrible squalor within government facilities that resemble internment camps. The government is clueless about what to do, and the situation appears to worsen by the day.

If only someone had a plan to end the human suffering; well lucky for the government, there is such a plan. In order to end the suffering of all these sweet and loveable children, the federal government needs to end welfare and legalize all drugs. Many readers are probably confused by this two point plan and are not sure what either point has to do with ending illegal immigration, but if one listens to liberal and conservative arguments it all becomes clear.

If anyone asks a liberal why Central American children are leaving their homes, many will say the mass emigration is a result of drug violence. Illegal drug cartels make a fortune in their homelands; with their earnings, drug cartels bribe, threaten, and kill politicians to create lawless countries filled with violence. From the liberal perspective, the United States is to blame for this drug violence because it buys the illegal drugs, which pay for the violence to continue. For this reason, liberals will often argue for the legalization of drugs in order to destroy the drug cartel industry in these poor countries. Without the violence of drug cartels, it is believed that the motivation to leave one’s homeland would dissipate and there would be less illegal immigration.

Conservatives have a different take on what is motivating illegal immigration. From their perspective, all immigrants come to the United States for the same reason, jobs. There are many job openings in the United States because of its large economy and how we treat the poor. Having one of the largest economies and significantly less corruption than many other countries in the world results in more opportunities and jobs in the United States compared to most immigrants’ home countries. Also the United States is so rich, many of their poor do not even work; instead, they collect welfare. Rather than make the poor work, which is what most countries have done throughout history, the United States has decided they would prefer their poor to sit at home and purchase drugs with the money they receive from the government. This “enlightened” view towards the poor results in a number of jobs being vacant, because the poor in the United States refuse to work them (i.e. harvesting fruit, cleaning, and working in Mexican Restaurants). The conservative solution to illegal immigration is to end welfare in its current form. When the poor are no longer receiving everything for free, they will be forced to go out and work. By entering the workforce, they will fill the jobs which are currently going to illegal immigrants.

Up until now, conservatives and liberals have been unable to work out a deal because they only view the problem from their perspective. In order to break the deadlock, we should simultaneously reform welfare and make drugs legal.

Many people are afraid of legalizing drugs and ending welfare in its current form, but if we did, it would not be that bad. If all illegal drugs were legalized tomorrow, the world would not end; everyone’s grandmother would not run out to the local store and shoot up heroin. Other countries have legalized drugs and they have not fallen into the ocean. Also an added bonus to the legalization of all drugs would be a dramatic decrease in crime, since most crime in the United States is drug related. This would lead to a significant drop in the number of people being imprisoned, which would save the government millions. Additional savings would also be realized by eliminating the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), since drugs are now legal.

Obviously all of welfare will not go away overnight, but if it was significantly cut, we could help the poor in society by providing them with an opportunity to break the vicious cycle of poverty through work. Welfare payments do not end poverty, it only perpetuates it. If welfare worked we would not be in year fifty of the war on poverty. By having both sides compromise, we could decrease the incentive to come to the United States, increase the incentive to stay in their home country, and decrease poverty as well as crime in the United States.

 

If you wish to spread the joy and knowledge of New Voice For Politics, please share this article, encourage your friends to like the Facebook page, or add their email to the subscriber list for this free newsletter.

 

soap box official use

 

 

 

 

 

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>