LarkenRose | Are you so selfless that you're willing to surrender some of your freedoms for the sake of the common good? If so, the joke's on you.

FFF.org | The moral issue is this: Why shouldn’t poor, inner-city, black teenagers have the unfettered right to freely compete against well-to-do white teenagers (and adults) by offering to work in any business or enterprise at any wage they’re willing to work for, even if it is less than the mandated minimum?

Power To Speak | Government (all governments) resembles nothing so much as a legalized Mafia that claims a monopoly over the use of initiatory violence, usually over a specific geographic area (but sometimes outside it — see U.S. government) in order to extract protection money (i.e., taxes) to fund its operations.

LostLibertyCafe.com | A lot of people these days are interested in socially conscious investing. I think it’s wonderful that investors are starting to look for investment opportunities that don’t support ills such as worker exploitation or environmental degradation. But there is one area of socially conscious investing that I haven’t heard much discussion about: government violence.

Strike-The-Root.com | Note that the clause in question speaks only of an “Enumeration” – i.e., the total number of people living in a given geographical region. It says precisely nothing about the ethnicity of said people, their occupations, level of earnings, or how many toilets happen to be in their home. It says nothing about whether you own pets, have a medical condition, or are a certain age. It means how many people live where you do. Period. End of story. But somewhere along the line, some group of smartass politicians decided that wasn’t good enough.