1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/18390/terrorists-run-rampant-and-the-police-do-nothing/

Terrorists run rampant and the police do nothing

September 10, 2011 by

Turns out a group of 500 terrorists stormed a food depot and transportation center in Washington state, held six guards hostage, and the police did nothing. Nothing!

Oh, wait. They are not terrorist, just an assembly of union workers. And the police may actually arrest a few, but only if they can identify the protesters. (Hey, why not start with the thug in the photo?)

Two lesson worth repeating: the police only protect property when it benefits the state and its sycophants; and, unions are nothing less than legalized force.

{ 30 comments }

Lucifer September 10, 2011 at 9:06 pm

Personal freedom is a function of population in relation to available land. We had it in the US because we had vast land with low population. Now it’s getting crowded. So, there’s going to be more rules. The rich are using their money to enslave the poor. The poor are going to fight back. We need a system that utilizes everyone. If not, the nation will turn on itself and destroy itself from within.

RWW September 10, 2011 at 9:34 pm

We need a system that utilizes everyone.

Yes — it’s called a free market. (Some call it capitalism.)

Don Lloyd September 10, 2011 at 9:34 pm

It seems that the Republicans’ best chance to beat Obama is to hang the Union Label around his neck. If he can’t restrain the unions, and he is unlikely to be able to do so for an extended period of time, all the Republicans need to do is break through the media bias and make people realize that, in an Obama America, non-union members are second class citizens at best.

Regards, Don

Richard Moss September 11, 2011 at 1:29 pm

Well, in this case, the Longshoreman aren’t protesting non-union labor, they are protesting that the jobs went to a different union! Read the last paragraph of the article the blog post links to…

Daniel September 10, 2011 at 10:10 pm

White Nationalist Think Tank

Nice!

Tyrone Dell September 10, 2011 at 11:44 pm

lol.

Old Mexican September 11, 2011 at 12:17 am

Re: Lucifer,

Personal freedom is a function of population in relation to available land.

That would make the Japanese easily the least free of all people. Or maybe makes you a lousy conceptualist.

The rich are using their money to enslave the poor.

Wow, sounds ominous – what is “the poor”?

We need a system that utilizes everyone.

“Utilizes”?

Lucifer September 11, 2011 at 4:02 am

Japan is an extremely uniform society. They practice a high degree of government involvement, which would be branded “socialism” in this country.

Richie September 11, 2011 at 8:12 am

YAWN.

FDominicus September 11, 2011 at 8:47 am

That probably explains their success on their road to “recovery”. I’m not impressed and I’m even less impressed since the 90ies. Now I see the “admiration” of China, (people who get things done) well one may say if they ssurvive.

That’s an art in China, they have no freedom there and our property is seizable any time…..

Richard Moss September 11, 2011 at 1:22 pm

Lucifer,

You wrote “The poor are going to fight back.”

Did you read the article? Here is the concluding paragraph;

“The union thinks it has the right to work at the facility, but the company has hired a contractor that’s staffing a work force of laborers from another union, the Portland-based Operating Engineers Local 701.”

The Longshoreman’s Union over-ran the facility because the company that owned it hired workers from a different union!

Lucifer September 11, 2011 at 3:54 pm

That’s a common union busting tactic. Every union negotiates its own wages. Not all unions are equal. So, a contractor will give work to a cheaper union. Most unions will not take part in displacing other union members, but from time to time this happens.

El Tonno September 11, 2011 at 7:24 pm

Sounds like the monopoly of the proletariat’s bosses.

Franklin September 11, 2011 at 3:53 pm

“Now it’s getting crowded.”
The hell it is.
Take a ride in an airplane; at 35,000 feet up, look out the window.
Then rethink your comment.
If it’s crowded where you live, ask yourself why.

sweatervest September 11, 2011 at 4:16 pm

Thank you! I recently drove across the whole country and the whole time I couldn’t stop thinking about how insane it is that anyone believes in “overpopulation”.

Lucifer September 11, 2011 at 4:47 pm

Why do you believe that the govt. keeps it from being developed?

Franklin September 11, 2011 at 6:05 pm

The government does not “keep it from being developed.”
The government simply keeps it for itself. And develops it as it wishes.

Ohhh Henry September 11, 2011 at 9:53 am

The rich are using their money to enslave the poor. The poor are going to fight back.

This is quite correct. Rich union leaders are using the government to enslave the poor, by maintaining a smaller and smaller number of higher and higher paid union jobs at the expense of everyone else. Rich bankers are using the government to print trillions of dollars in order to enrich themselves while the poor are stuck with debt, taxes and inflation. Rich arms manufacturers and rich Washington bureaucrats are using the government to maintain a bogus “War on Terror” to enslave the poor with a draconian security apparatus.

Do you see the common thread?

HL September 11, 2011 at 12:10 pm

Exactamundo!

mikey September 11, 2011 at 1:51 pm

Oh Henry I tried to post this at Mises Canada re your comment on oilsands. No luck, so here it is sorry to others for being a mile off topic.
I have been working in the Oilsands since 1975. You are justified in your suspicions that the oilsands are a government subsidized white elephant. Here is a brief outline from memory.
The first plants date back to the 1930s they were entirely government built. The second world war and then the discovery of conventional oil in Leduc caused interest in oilsands to fade away.
However by the late fifties there was renewed interest due to turmoil in the mideast, Suez crisis, etc
A company was formed, GCOS (now Suncor) to build an operating plant to mine, extract and upgrade oilsands
deposits into synthetic crude.Work began in 1958 and the plant began production around 1964.
There followed decades of subsidies. Why? The plant could not produce oil under the world price. Every barrel was subsidized by Canadian taxpayers.
Syncrude was the second plant to be built. The pilot plant started construction in 1966.Imperial oil was the majority
owner. Around 1971, the decision was made to go ahead with the large plant. But in June 1974 Imperial announced that the project would be abandoned.Construction would stop and the workers sent home.For political reasons the Federal and provincial government of Alberta wanted to save the project even though it was not truly feasible.
Offered Imperial hundreds of millions in cash if they would continue the project. Imperial agreed and the two governments became partners.
The plant was finished and began producing oil around 1980, but in 1981 Imperial announced they were going to abandon the plant. They were losing money on every barrel as the costs of servicing the 2.2 billion capitalization
were larger than revenues. Rather than see the plant fail the federal government paid Imperial the entire capitalization costs . Now the plant was ‘feasible’.
The 1980s saw the price of oil get crushed. There was no interest in the private sector or in government to subsidize any more plants.For 15 years, this was the situation. Then in 1996, the moribund economy caused the Alberta government to change the royalty structure for oilsands as an incentive for plant expansion.No royalties would be paid until the cap costs were paid off. This change, plus optimism about the future of oil prices was enough to spark a second wave of development.
Some technical info- Oilsands are actually tar. At room temp, it has the consistency of peanut butter. This mix of tar and sand is mined in open pit mines (except for SAGD plants which I will explain later) It is transported to the extraction area where it is mixed with hot water (and in the old days caustic soda.) Then it must be spun in large centrifuges to separate fine clay particles.
Next step is Upgrading. This converts the tar or bitumen into synthetic crude.Here hydrogen is added and carbon removed in giant “cokers.” The hydrogen is made from natural gas and steam at 1000 degrees F and requires massive amount of natural gas, the largest feedstock required by the plant.
Large areas of the plant are devoted to handling the diluting agent. This is a liquid hydrocarbon like naptha, very low
viscosity. It makes it possible to pump the thick bitumen around the plant. It is separated out at the end and reused.
Also required are large settling tanks, as the diluted bitumen has the consistency of soap suds and must be stiired with large paddles to get it back to liquid form so it can be pumped.
Also, the plant needs a large Co-Gen to prduce the large amounts of electricity needed.
As well the plant needs a pumphouse for the huge amounts of water required.
I could go on and on but I hope this gives you an idea of why the costs involved are so high to produce a barrel of crude
Some conventional oil can be produced as cheaply as 3 or 4 dollars. Break even costs for oilsands are in my rough estimation around 50 to 80 dollars, this does not include servicing debt.

Walt D. September 11, 2011 at 3:31 pm

I don’t think it depends on the price of oil. If it takes more than the energy in a barrel of oil to produce a barrel of oil, in the long run it will not be viable. (Incidentally, this why using corn to produce ethanol is a stupid idea.)

Greg September 12, 2011 at 1:45 pm

Not necessarily. Part of the benefit of oil is the compactness of energy. It may be economical one day to use solar or wind power to convert these oil sands into usable oil, for situations where you need compact energy. Of course, improvements in battery technology may render this use of oil obsolete as well. Then there are the other oil products such as plastics.

Walt D. September 12, 2011 at 6:25 pm

What you say about the compactness of the energy source is true. However, Lake Athabasca is only a few hundred miles south of the Arctic Circle, so solar power would not work in the winter. I’m not even sure that it would work in the summer, even though it is light almost 24 hours a day. At the moment, I think they use natural gas to get the oil out of the tar sands.

Ohhh Henry September 11, 2011 at 10:23 pm

mikey … thanks a lot for this, you confirmed my suspicions.

I hope that if there is a problem at mises.ca with the commenting then it gets straightened out. It would be good to discuss local Canadian matters in a Misesian way. Maybe they should copy and paste the software from mises.org? Seems to work well over here and I see very little spam.

Walt D. September 11, 2011 at 1:19 pm

The trade unions are not only major contributors to the Democrats, but they also get out the vote. They are key to Barack Obama’s re-election. Do you really think that a politicized justice department with Eric Holder as Head Eunuch is going to take any action?

vc September 11, 2011 at 6:38 pm

Indeed Walt.

I am currently reading The Roosecelt Myth which goes into quite a bit of detail regarding the use of government created cartels, unions, and especially the WPA as voting blocks.

It has been that way from the beginning- government granted privilege in exchange for votes.

J. Murray September 12, 2011 at 5:36 am

All it takes is 18% of the population to capture a legislative body and 34% to capture an executive.

victor September 12, 2011 at 6:23 am

Love the picture in the article. If it were some peace activist standing on the tracks, protesting U.S. adventures overseas, at a taxpayer owned U.S. military base, that Longshoreman wouldn’t have a leg to stand…like Brian Wilson at Alemeda Naval Magazine. However, socialists in governmen have no problem allowing force by mobs on and against private property.

Keapon Laffin September 12, 2011 at 8:54 am

Just want to thank you for calling it what it is. I don’t think the conservative blogs went to far to call it ‘terrorism’, but this is a case for Homeland Security. They invaded a Port! The did the exact equivalent of breaking into an Airport and hijacking a FedEx plane. It is absolutely nothing less than that. Whether or not they took off/sailed the ship somewhere is irrelevant. It’s still a hijacking.
I’ve seen the usual ‘It’d be different if it was the TEA party that did it’. Yup, there would already be some folks in Guantanamo and rightly so.

And just because they didn’t bring explosives or firebombs THIS time…
They have in the past, and they ain’t exactly getting less angry.

Mitch Kordonowy September 13, 2011 at 1:56 am

It *is* rather interesting isn’t it, this double-standard.
Part of me is still salivating on the idea of posting this on a social network site, just to see what gargbaj my progressive friends would apologize for.
But alas, I cannot seem to stomach the arguments like I used to.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: