Daily Archives: February 24, 2017

Boynton man gets two years for embezzlement he blames on gambling – Palm Beach Post

Posted: February 24, 2017 at 7:02 pm

WEST PALM BEACH

A 59-year-old Boynton Beach man was sentenced to two years in prison and ordered to get help for a gambling problem that he claimed led him to embezzle roughly $1.7 million from construction companies where he worked.

Alan Gainsborg was also ordered by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra to pay $1.1 million in restitution to MSP Enterprises Inc. and PH Developers LLC, two Boynton Beach development companies owned by Michael Puder. He repaid roughly $560,000 and handed over the deed to his house when his scheme unraveled and he was fired in November 2015, according to court documents.

Gainsborg, who pleaded guilty in December to two charges of mail fraud, was allowed to remain free on bond. He is to turn himself in on April 24.

With the help of a Deerfield Beach man who wasnt charged, federal prosecutors claim Gainsborg sent fake invoices to Puder. When Puder questioned the bills, Gainsborg ran them through two general contractors. Those men, however, didnt know Gainsborg was stealing from Puder and didnt make any money on the scam, prosecutors said.

Gainsborg began working for Puder in July 2013. Puder is a developer of both commercial and residential projects, including the 130-home Waterview at Boynton Lakes, 115-home Montego Bay at Boca Pointe and The Grove, a 550-unit townhouse complex in Boynton Beach.

Continued here:

Boynton man gets two years for embezzlement he blames on gambling - Palm Beach Post

Posted in Gambling | Comments Off on Boynton man gets two years for embezzlement he blames on gambling – Palm Beach Post

Quebec Moves Toward Euthanasia for Alzheimer’s – National Review

Posted: at 7:02 pm

Our neighbor to the north demonstrates vividly how the logic of euthanasia consciousness spreads like a virus.

Once a society generally accepts killing as an acceptable response to human suffering, the killable categories expand exponentiallyclearly seen in the Netherlands and Belgium where psychiatrists kill the mentally ill, sometimes coupled with organ harvesting.

Abuses? What abuses?

Canada is driving that same road with the pedal to the metal. Quebec is now actively considering expanding euthanasia to include the mentally incompetent if they asked to be killed in an advance directive. From the Montreal Gazette story:

A consensus is emerging among Quebec parliamentarians to launch a public debate on the appropriateness of legalizing medically assisted suicide for persons unable to give informed consent, such as patients suffering from Alzheimers disease.

My mother died of Alzheimers, so I know what this disease is like.

I also know that it would have been wrong to allow herworst fears about what her life was going to belike when the illness beganto bite, to allow her to order herself poisoned to death when she lost capacity.

Even in my mothers very difficult final days, there were good moments in which she was able to receive and give love.

To say she would have been killable because she was so ill would have been to say that her loss of capacities rendered less than human. Not on my watch.

And that brings up an ironic point: At the same time in whichconcerted efforts are being undertaken to reduce the categories of animals killed by euthanasiaa worthy causesimilar efforts are underway where euthanasia is widely accepted to expand the number of people so killed.

That path leads to extreme moral peril.

The same progression we have seen in Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, and now Canada, will happen here if assisted suicide ever becomes widely accepted. Its only logical.

And heres the worst part: When that happens, people wont care because societys adherence to the equality/sanctity of human lifewill have been fundamentally subverted.

Read more:

Quebec Moves Toward Euthanasia for Alzheimer's - National Review

Posted in Euthanasia | Comments Off on Quebec Moves Toward Euthanasia for Alzheimer’s – National Review

Lessons from indigenous wisdom in the euthanasia debate – MercatorNet

Posted: at 7:02 pm

Lessons from indigenous wisdom in the euthanasia debate
MercatorNet
George's words came to mind as wise advice for those of us engaging in the legalization of euthanasia debate currently raging in Australia. They struck me as especially apropos in light of the fact that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island and First ...

Follow this link:

Lessons from indigenous wisdom in the euthanasia debate - MercatorNet

Posted in Euthanasia | Comments Off on Lessons from indigenous wisdom in the euthanasia debate – MercatorNet

WA election: Euthanasia, Safe Schools hot topics as Liberal, Labor leaders face Christian voters – ABC Online

Posted: at 7:02 pm

Posted February 24, 2017 09:56:22

Colin Barnett and Mark McGowan have clashed over voluntary euthanasia and the Safe Schools program during a public question and answer session organised by the Australian Christian Lobby in the lead-up to the state election.

More than 500 people attended the event in Wangara on Thursday night to hear the WA Premier and Opposition Leader's stance on issues ranging from Aboriginal youth suicide and prostitution reform to babies surviving abortions.

Unlike Wednesday night's televised leaders' debate that focused on debt, deficit and unemployment, neither leader took aim at the other's credibility instead focusing on the social issues facing WA and drawing from personal experiences and anecdotes to help sell their case.

Two of the questions that raised a vocal reaction from the crowd were centred on euthanasia and the Safe Schools program.

Mr Barnett said while he had sympathy for people who had "painful and long deaths", he did not support euthanasia.

"I think it is an issue that is left to the family at the time and to the doctors," he told the crowd.

"I think palliative care and relying on professional moral ethics and religious standards and ethics is the way to go."

He was at odds with his opponent Mr McGowan, who used his personal experience of the death of a relative to explain why he backed assisted dying.

"He should have been able to make his own decision in those circumstances on the time of his passing," he said.

"Voluntary euthanasia, with appropriate safeguards, is something I personally support.

"My party has a position whereby it's a conscience vote, so every member of my caucus gets to vote according to their own point of view if a bill came before the Parliament."

Mr Barnett and Mr McGowan were also left at odds after being questioned about Safe Schools, a federally funded anti-bullying program designed to help educate students about sexual and gender diversity.

"Will your party commit to removing this highly controversial and sexualised program from all Western Australian schools?" a church leader asked.

Mr McGowan backed Safe Schools.

"A lot of young people who identify as gay are very likely to commit suicide. There are also problems with young people identifying as gay with being bullied at school," he said.

"My understanding of the program is that it provides advice to teachers and assistance to teachers in dealing with children or young people who might identify as gay.

"A public high school in Western Australia that wants to access that program on the advice of their school board and school community, I think is reasonable, and they should be able to access that program."

However, Mr Barnett disagreed.

"From my knowledge of it and I've never read the material but I've heard fellow members of Parliament describing it to me it encourages experimentation, promiscuity, to very young children," Mr Barnett said.

"I don't think that is any way what should happen in our school, and I don't think you should have situations where boys' could think ... they've got the right to use the girls' toilets.

"My view, and it's not a directive, but my view to schools [is] I do not want to see that program in our schools."

Mr Barnett said he believed fewer than 30 WA schools had incorporated the program into the curriculum.

Topics: elections, religion-and-beliefs, government-and-politics, schools, euthanasia, wa

The rest is here:

WA election: Euthanasia, Safe Schools hot topics as Liberal, Labor leaders face Christian voters - ABC Online

Posted in Euthanasia | Comments Off on WA election: Euthanasia, Safe Schools hot topics as Liberal, Labor leaders face Christian voters – ABC Online

Bill in Congress to align Meskwaki law jurisdiction – Tama News-Herald – Toledo Chronicle

Posted: at 7:01 pm

Iowa Senators Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst reintroduced legislation to grant the Sac and Fox - Meskwaki Settlement power to enforce laws for certain crimes committed on its land, bringing its authority in line with that of the vast majority of Indian country. The announcement was made in a news release issued on Thursday, Feb. 16.

The Sac and Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa has supported the change. Sac and Fox Judge Jessica Bear and Meskwaki Nation Tribal Police Chief Jeff Schlock were on hand in Des Moines on April 8 of last year when Governor Terry Branstad signed a Senate file which requested the federal government to take over jurisdiction on the settlement.

This step cleared the way for the legislation now introduced.

The Justice Center on the Meskwaki Settlement west of Tama. -Chronicle file/John Speer

The creation of the Meskwaki Tribal Court system along with the police force is credited for making the switch in jurisdiction responsibility possible. Until the 2006 establishment of the Meskwaki Nation Tribal Police Department, the Tama County Sheriff's Office was in charge. THE FBI and U.S. Marshal's Office were also relied upon for certain cases during the period.

In statements accompanying the press reels the senators said:

"Our legislation kicks off the final step in a coordinated process to ensure the Meskwaki enjoy the same authority to enforce criminal law on their land as tribes have in nearly every other part of the country. It's important that we respect the autonomy of the Meskwaki to govern themselves and enforce violations of law on their own land involving members of their tribe. The Iowa state legislature overwhelmingly passed the necessary legislation to grant this authority, and Governor Branstad has signed it. It's time now for the U.S. Congress to act and ensure the Meskwaki people are treated the same as nearly every other tribe in the United States," Grassley said.

"I'm pleased to join Senator Grassley in reintroducing this important legislation that will directly impact the members of the Sac and Fox Tribe of the Mississippi/Meskwaki Nation in Iowa," said Senator Ernst. "This bill would repeal a 1948 law that restricted the tribe's criminal authority, and return jurisdiction over certain criminal offenses committed on the Meskwaki Tribal Settlement to the tribe. In line with guidance provided by the U.S. Department of Justice, the State of Iowa first enacted a law to restore such jurisdiction to the tribe. I commend the work of all parties involved in laying the groundwork for this legislation, and I hope to see it passed and signed into law."

In most places across the country, state criminal jurisdiction over Indian land is limited to crimes by non-Indians against non-Indians and victimless crimes by non-Indians. However, because of a 1948 law, state authorities have jurisdiction over crimes committed on the Meskwaki settlement, just as it does elsewhere in Iowa. The law also grants the federal government exclusive jurisdiction over major crimes committed in Indian country, even though in most other places around the country, the federal government shares jurisdiction with the state.

The legislation would bring Iowa in line with other states by limiting its criminal jurisdiction on the Meskwaki settlement to crimes by non-Indians against non-Indians and victimless crimes by non-Indians. It also allows the state and federal governments to share jurisdiction for major crimes on the settlement involving tribal members.

To transfer authority, the Iowa legislature had to first enact legislation establishing the limits on the state's jurisdiction over tribal land. Now that the state has acted, the U.S. Congress must now pass this legislation and the President must sign it to repeal the 1948 law, completing the transfer of authority.

Read this article:

Bill in Congress to align Meskwaki law jurisdiction - Tama News-Herald - Toledo Chronicle

Posted in Victimless Crimes | Comments Off on Bill in Congress to align Meskwaki law jurisdiction – Tama News-Herald – Toledo Chronicle

JAILED: Drug and gambling addict brought misery to train passengers – Eastwood Advertiser

Posted: at 7:01 pm

14:15 15:08 Friday 24 February 2017

A drug and gambling addict who brought misery to thousands of rail passengers across the East Midlands area has been jailed for 26 months.

Lucas Niewiem, 35, was sentenced at Nottingham Crown Court on Wednesday for stealing cable from the railway line in the Long Eaton and Nottingham areas on eight occasions in March and April last year.

Niewiem, who had previously admitted to using an axe to chop the cable from live lines, pocketed a total of just 1,000 for his crimes by selling the cable to a scrap metal dealer.

His actions, however, resulted in 3,267 minutes of delays to trains in the East Midlands area and cost Network Rail over 164,500.

Niewiem was arrested at his home address on Lawton Close in Nottingham on April 28 after he was identified through forensic evidence left at the scene.

When officers searched his house, a cannabis farm was discovered above a child's bedroom in the loft.

Twenty-four plants cultivating cannabis with a street value of 24,000 were found which Niewiem claimed to be growing for personal use.

Detective Inspector Gareth Davies, of British Transport Police, said: "Niewiem's drug and gambling addition led him to risk his life to target the railway to steal cable to fund his habit and lifestyle.

"His selfish actions resulted in misery for thousands of passengers who were left stranded on platforms waiting for delayed trains throughout the East Midland area in March and April last year."

Niewiem was given a 26-month jail term, 16 for the theft of cable, eight months behind bars for cannabis production and a further two-months' term for an unrelated theft, drugs and breach of a non-molestation order from January.

DI Davies added: "Cable theft is not a victimless crime; it costs the rail industry millions of pounds each year and disrupts passenger journeys and busy lives.

"We take this type of crime extremely seriously, and we will do all we can to bring offenders to justice.

"We worked closely with Network Rail and East Midlands Trains to secure the sentence against Niewem which we hope sends act as a deterrent to others."

Hayley Bull, community safety manager at Network Rail, said: "This case demonstrates just how costly cable theft from the railway can be.

"Trespassing onto the network for any reason is extremely dangerous, as well as being illegal.

"This incident shows how cable theft can end up costing the taxpayer huge sums of money to put right, as well as causing mass disruption to passengers trying to go about their daily lives.

"It also causes delays to improvement work, which is vital to create a more reliable railway.

"We are continually developing better ways to protect the railway from cable thieves and will continue to work with the British Transport Police to prosecute anyone caught carrying out such a mindless act of vandalism."

Sarah Potts, crime and security strategy manager for East Midlands Trains, said: "We are delighted with this result as cable theft not only costs the railway industry a lot of money but can cause significant disruption for travelling customers.

"The jail term demonstrates that we take cable theft seriously and will continue to support our partners at British Transport Police and Network Rail in seeking convictions for individuals who selfishly inconvenience our customers."

See original here:

JAILED: Drug and gambling addict brought misery to train passengers - Eastwood Advertiser

Posted in Victimless Crimes | Comments Off on JAILED: Drug and gambling addict brought misery to train passengers – Eastwood Advertiser

Inside The Quiet, Prophetic Politics Of CS Lewis – The Federalist

Posted: at 7:01 pm

Although it was published more than 70years ago, C. S. Lewiss The Abolition of Man reads like a commentary on modern American education, sociology, and politics. With uncanny prophetic powers, Lewis, an Oxford don and Cambridge professor who never read a newspaper orset foot in America, accurately diagnosed our twenty-first-century social-political-educational ills.

At the core of Lewiss critique lies modernitys abandonment of all objective aesthetic, moral-ethical, and philosophical-theological standards. There is nothing essentially sublime about a waterfall; that is just a subjective preference that we project on to it. In the same way, virtues like courage and loyalty and values like patriotism and the inherent dignity of every individual are not universal absolutes written into our conscience but mere feelings and opinions.

Statements like this is good (as opposed to wrong) or this is true (as opposed to false) or this is beautiful (as opposed to ugly) have no factual, scientific basis and thus have no binding power outside the individual or group that makes them. The realm of objective science may be governed by unchanging laws of nature, but no such natural law exists to govern the subjective realms of the Good, the True, and the Beautiful.

What this has led to in the halls of public education, the central focus of The Abolition of Man, is the debunking and dismantling of the teachers traditional task of training students to know, heed, and embody the universal, cross-cultural moral-ethical codewhat Lewis calls the Tao. No longer a virtuous guide and mentor, the teacher morphs into a controller who manages students the way a commercial farmer manages chickens. In the absence of fixed, objective standards, students become malleable commodities that can and will be shaped in accordance with the prevailing orthodoxies of those in power.

Such is the inevitable outcome of a Tao-less education, an outcome that itself carries ominous sociopolitical implications. For once our social and political leaders have thrown out any Tao-based understanding of what it means to be human, they can begin to reshape all of humanityand, because they now have at their disposal scientific methods of eugenics and social engineering, they will most likely succeed in their goal.

No one who reads The Abolition of Man carefully can fail to see the political implications of Lewiss critique, and yet, anyone who knows Lewiss life and writings knows that he was not a person who took an active interestindeed, any interestin politics. What is the Lewis scholar or aficionado to do with this seeming dilemma? Until now, not much.

Thankfully, however, that situation has been remedied by Justin Buckley Dyer and Micah J. Watsons brief but incisive new book, C. S. Lewis on Politics and the Natural Law. Through a close analysis of Lewiss extensive works and letters, Dyer, associate professor of political science and director of the Kinder Institute on Constitutional Democracy at the University of Missouri, and Watson, 2015-16 William Spoelhof Teacher-Scholar Chair and associate professor of political science at Calvin College, demonstrate that Lewis not only had much to say about politics, but that what he said needs to be heeded by those of us who live half a century after his death.

The Abolition of Man, Dyer and Watson argue, is indeed a political book grounded in the foundational biblical teaching that man was made in the image of God (imago dei) but is fallen. It is because of this dual aspect of our nature that we know the Taoit is inscribed in our conscienceand are bound to obey it, while also knowing, when we are honest with ourselves, that we do not and cannot keep it. Everything Lewis wrote about ethics and politics rested on his understanding of these two first acts [Creation and Fall] of the biblical drama, observe Dyer and Watson.

Because Lewis believed firmly in the imago dei, he believed we all had access, through our reason and conscience, to the Tao: that is, the natural law. Because he believed just as firmly in the Fall, he, despite his love of medieval monarchy, advocated a classical liberal view of government that bears much similarity to Lockes view of limited government and Mills harm principle. It is in ferreting out these two aspects of Lewiss non-systematic political views that Dyer and Watson make their greatest, and their most original, contribution to Lewis studies.

In a way that no Lewis critic I am aware of has yet done, Dyer and Watson set Lewiss Broadcast Talks, which were later collected and published as Mere Christianity, in their historical context. Notably, World War II drove Lewis toward an affirmation of natural lawif there is no Tao, then no one can justifiably condemn Nazi ethics as universally and cross-culturally wrong. By contrast, World War II drove German theologian Karl Barth away from natural law, because he concluded that if we allow for a source of divine truth apart from the Bible, then the door is left open for the Nazis to baptize their own culture and fuse it with the revealed gospel.

Although Dyer and Watson treat Barth sympathetically, they argue, convincingly, that, in allowing the horrors of Nazism to push him away from the ability of human reason to perceive general revelation, Barth not only broke from the traditional theology of Luther and Calvin but set reformed Protestantism on a trajectory away from natural law. Even after the war, Barth remained antagonistic to any claimed source of theological knowledge outside of Gods revelation in the person of Jesus Christ, including any claim that God had revealed truths in reason, in conscience, in the emotions, in history, in nature, and in culture and its achievements and developments, they note.

In a knowing rebuttal of the anti-natural law stance of Barth, Lewis begins the Broadcast Talks (and later Mere Christianity) with a what the authors describe as defense of objective moral principles. In offering the twentieth centurys finest apologetic for Christianity, Lewis was also consciously preaching fidelity to the old moral law, revealed in nature and known by reason, at a time when the idea of natural law was under serious attack by prominent Protestant theologians [like Barth] as well as secular philosophers, scientists, and social planners. Indeed, when it came time for Lewis to write his seminal work of literary history and theory, English Literature in the Sixteenth Century Excluding Drama (1954), Dyer and Watson note Lewis coined the term Barthianism to describe the modern Calvinist penchant for flattening all things into common insignificance before the inscrutable Creator.

What has all this to do with politics? A great deal. Barths abandonment of natural law has by no means protected us from the encroachment of totalitarianism into our public schools and social programs. To the contrary, in the absence of Lewiss Tao, it has become all the easier for educators and politicians alike to carve out new goals and rights for man that have nothing to do with our true ontological status as creatures made in the image of God but fallen.

What then is to be done? Though Lewis was clearly drawn toward monarchy, a system he incarnates and celebrates so memorably in his Chronicles of Narnia, he nevertheless upheld democracy as the best form of government. Lewis was a partisan of classical liberal democracy, not because it allowed for maximum political participation for all of a nations citizens, but because it curtailed the likelihood of political tyranny. He was a democrat because he believed human nature had been corrupted, the authors note. Given our fallen state, it was unwise to entrust too much power to a single individual or group, a sentiment that was expressed even more strongly by one of Lewiss mentors, G. K. Chesterton.

But does this put Lewis in the same camp as Locke? Though I was initially skeptical on this pointI view Locke as a deist whose rejection of innate knowledge leaves little room for a God-given conscienceDyer and Watson won me over through careful argumentation and balanced proof texting. Both Locke and Lewis believed that the end of government was the protection of individuals and their property, broadly understood. Both claimed that God is the ultimate source of property, and as such, God is the ontological source of genuine morality, though people could still access that morality without acknowledging God as its source or agreeing on how to best relate to God, they write.

If Dyer and Watsons equating of Lewis and Locke made me do a double take, then their equating of Lewis with John Stuart Mill made me do a triple take. Could there possibly be any meeting ground between the great Christian apologist and the Victorian utilitarian who, to my mind at least, was a functional atheist? Though more circumspect in making this link, Dyer and Watson demonstrate that Lewis, like Mill, saw governments role, not to make men moral, but to do as little harm as possible. And that includes, as disturbing as it may appear to conservative Christians like myself, Lewiss suggestion that secular states need not criminalize divorce, homosexuality, or other victimless crimes.

Still, Dyer and Watson make it clear that Lewiss liberalism does not put him in league with utilitarianism as a theory of politics or of the nature of man. Accordingly, Lewiss liberalism stems from a commitment not to neutrality among competing conceptions of the good nor to the greatest happiness for the greatest number. . . . Lewis invokes the harm principle to protect society from the dangers of theocracy and to protect the Church from the dangers of blasphemy. Lewis prudentially adopted a utilitarian strategy in order to foster a regime most likely to promote and facilitate human flourishing. As such, his commitment to teleology is not necessarily undermined by his use of Mills harm principle.

It is through discerning passages like this one, in which careful distinctions are drawn between theory and practice, foundational principles and pragmatic realities, that Dyer and Watson prove themselves to be reliable guides through Lewiss scattered writings on politics and the too often scatter-brained attempts of modern and postmodern educators, sociologists, and political theorists to establish justice and ensure domestic tranquility in a world that has lost its moorings in the Tao.

See the article here:

Inside The Quiet, Prophetic Politics Of CS Lewis - The Federalist

Posted in Victimless Crimes | Comments Off on Inside The Quiet, Prophetic Politics Of CS Lewis – The Federalist

Uber Is Doomed – Jalopnik

Posted: at 7:00 pm

Illustration credit: Jim Cooke/Jalopnik

If there is one quote that sums up the ethos of Uber, it might be this cut from the companys firebrand CEO Travis Kalanick: Stand by your principles and be comfortable with confrontation. So few people are, so when the people with the red tape come, it becomes a negotiation. But after a month marked by one disaster after another, its hard to see how Ubers defiant, confrontational attitude hasnt blown up in its face. And those disasters mask one key, critical issue: Uber is doomed because it cant actually make money.

After a discombobulated 2016, in which Uber burned through more than $2 billion, amid findings that rider fares only cover roughly 40 percent of a ride, with the remainder subsidized by venture capitalists, its hard to imagine Kalanick could take the company public at its stunning current valuation of nearly $70 billion.

And now, in the past few weeks alone, Uber has been accused of having a workplace that fosters a culture of misogyny, accused of stealing from Google the blueprint of a successful self-driving system, and has lost 200,000 customers over ties to President Donald Trump and how it responded to a taxi driver boycott.

Yet even when those factors are removed, its becoming more evident that Uber will collapse on its own. Barring a drastic shift in the companys businessan implausible rollout of self-driving car fleets across the U.S., an increase of fares by three-fold, or a complete monopolization of the taxi and ride-hailing marketsUbers lifeline is shrinking. Its business model could collapse if one court case, and there are many, goes against it. Or perhaps more pressing, if it simply runs out of cash.

That Kalanick quote about confrontation may be as innocuous as a random sound bite, but its representative of the ride-hailing giants methodology since its founding in 2009: a perpetual resistance to regulatory oversight; a belief that, ultimately, an unfettered market is the key to prosperity.

At first glance it seems like Kalanicks libertarian ideals have paid off. Most recently valued at a reported $69 billion, Uber has captured a majority of the ground transportation market and flipped the taxi industrya sector Kalanick once famously and snidely referred to as the Big Taxi Cartelon its head. His philosophy mirrors the mindset of one of his favorite authors, the laissez-faire Ayn Rand. In 2012, Kalanick proffered that Ubers battle against government regulations has an uncanny resemblance to the Randian philosophy. A billionaire fighting The Systemand prevailing. Its a good story for those who find truth in Atlas Shrugged.

Ubers long had skeptics, and its not innovative to paint Kalanick, 40, as the boogeyman of Silicon Valley, where unseemly savants exist in vast supply.

The precarious moment in the companys eight-year history falls on Kalanicks lap. Its his baby after alla startup founded on seemingly nothing more than a vague idea, without much regard for the workforce to make it possible, or even a clear idea of what business model it actually wants to pursue. Uber has jumped from one idea to the next: UberX, UberEats, autonomous cars, and now flying cars, of all things.

The impact of Ubers death would probably be as much of a rebuke of Kalanicks vision of running on a scatterbrained dream, not so much a solid business model and philosophy, that you could muster.

It would also be devastating for some. The livelihood of 11,000 employees across the world rests on Kalanicks decision to submit to that philosophywhich, at its core, is a ruthless way of doing business. At the very least, drivers in the pre-Uber market could earn a decent living. Conversely, for example, Uber drivers taking advantage of new vehicle solution pilot program in Boston renting cars by the hour through Zipcar will earn less than Massachusetts minimum wage. How innovative.

One of the biggest issues that has left Ubers business model hanging in the balance is its resistance to classifying its driversthere are reportedly600,000 in the U.S.as employees, not contractors. If Uber is a house of cards, this is a key part of the foundation that, once removed, would demolish the structure.

Indeed, the company has said reclassifying drivers could force Uber to restructure its entire business model. The result of its opposition to readjust has been entirely expected. Without the perks and protectionsthat an employee may enjoyhealth care, benefits, gasoline and work reimbursements, vehicle maintenance, all of which could reportedly total as much as $730 millioncomplaints from drivers have piled up, ranging from low pay to new services like UberEats (a loathed food delivery service thats reportedly set to lose over $100 million annually) and UberPOOL, its carpool option which increases the companys take per-ride, lowers the take-home pay for drives, and is understood to be quite a drag for drivers and passengers alike. Drivers themselves said as much in a recent, disastrous question-and-answer session with Ubers president.

The counter-argumentperhaps one that would come from Kalanick himselfis that Uber drivers have the freedom to work whenever and wherever they want, or for the company at all. But the reality is that perception is built on a lie.

Uber, which didnt respond to questions from Jalopnik about its viability, recently paid $20 million to settle claims that it grossly misled how much drivers could earn on Craigslist ads. The companys explosive growth also fundamentally required it to begin offering subprime auto loans to prospective drivers without a vehicle.

Drivers with loans need to work to pay their monthly tab, thereby necessitating they work more for less, and so on. (Figures released in 2015 indicated that nearly 40 percent of Ubers driver force has no other source of income, while 30 percent work for Uber while holding down a second part-time job.)

To maximize their income, some have taken to sleeping in their car to be close to busier work areas. And beyond drivers, the company has also been accused of lying to prospective engineers about promises of lucrative stock options, in a move that could allegedly save it millions of dollars of tax deductions.

The Craigslist ads, for one thing, succeeded in reeling in drivers.

I thought I would try it out because I was desperate, said one driver who learned about the company after reading an online ad and declined to be named for fear of retribution in an interview with Jalopnik. Back then, the pay was quite a bit more than it is now. There have been a number of fare cuts since then. So, at the beginning, it was kind of different because not only was the pay higher, [but] because the pay was higher, there was a different type of customer that was using the service.

He added, And then contrast that with now with uberPOOL, a driver can be getting paid just 80 cents for a ride, and all the sudden you have these people who mightve been taking the bus, and now all the sudden theyre your boss for 80 cents and you better hop to and do what they say with a smile, or youre going to get a 1 star rating, if not [physically] assaulted in some cases.

That strikes at a core tenet of Ubers case that it provides a far-superior taxi service. Violent incidents, for example, involving drivers and passengers have popped up timeandagain against a backdrop of the companys campaign to prevent it from having to subject prospective drivers to extensive fingerprint background checks. Really, what is an Uber but a taxi with a smartphone app? Even then, taxi services have launched apps of their own.

Customers want to get from A to B quickly, pleasantly, and at a reasonable price, said Erik Gordon, a professor at the University of Michigans Ross School of Business. The Uber thing worked because it was cheaper and, initially, it was more pleasant than the typical taxi. So thats why it worked. But people dont have loyalty to Uber, not even the drivers. The drivers tend to drive for both Uber and Lyft, its chief competitor and a company with a remarkably more cuddly public image, albeit one that is probably not deserved.

But its the driver classification as contractors thats routinely staked out as potentially devastating for Uber. A $100 million settlement for a high-profile federal class-action suit over driver classification was denied last year, but the judge in the case believes Uber has enough wiggle room to readjust and still survive, despite the companys insistence that it would have to wholly restructure its operations. While that case remains pending, more suits over the driver classification have continued to emerge.

If you lose a case in a statethe state asserts theyre employees for state lawit would encourage other states to file lawsuits, but you only lose state by state, Gordon said. If you lose it at the federal level theyre in huge trouble.

The part-time model can last forever, he continued. But with drivers doing this more or less full time, he said, Something has to change; the price of the rides has to change... And if what changes is these people end up being employees, then I think the whole house falls down.

Its not just Uber drivers who feel downtrodden. A widely-circulated essay published last week by a former engineer described a series of incidents that painted the companys headquarters as a space that fostered repeated, systemic sexual harassment.

The essay by Susan Fowler Rigetti alleged that her former boss, for instance, solicited her for sex.

On my first official day rotating on the team, my new manager sent me a string of messages over company chat. He was in an open relationship, he said, and his girlfriend was having an easy time finding new partners but he wasnt. He was trying to stay out of trouble at work, he said, but he couldnt help getting in trouble, because he was looking for women to have sex with. It was clear that he was trying to get me to have sex with him, and it was so clearly out of line that I immediately took screenshots of these chat messages and reported him to HR.

When Fowler Rigetti engaged with HR, she said, they responded that even though this was clearly sexual harassment and he was propositioning me, it was this mans first offense ... he was a high performer. Translation: Nothing would happen to him.

Kalanick immediately issued a statement that what Fowler Rigetti described is abhorrent and against everything Uber stands for and believes in. He added that it was the first time hed learned of the allegations. An investigation was ordered, and Uber hired former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to conduct the internal probe.

But Silicon Valley is a small place, where high-profile talent bounce around companies on a regular basis. People talk. For Uber, the damage may have already been done.

I think this could definitely take a toll, said one former Uber exec who requested anonymity, adding: Its going to be difficult to continue to recruit the best and brightest talent.

Fowler Rigetti claims Uber had a game-of-thrones political war ranging within the ranks of upper management in the infrastructure engineering organization. Managers and peers duked it out, she said, while some attempted to undermine their direct supervisors with the intention of taking their job.

The ramifications of these political games were significant: projects were abandoned left and right, she said. The discontent and disorder at Uber HQ that she describes doesnt lend credence to the idea that its facilitating a decent work environment to succeed going forward.

In late November, the financial blog Naked Capitalism published the first of a series of pieces by transportation industry analyst Hubert Horan on the financial viability of Uber. The posts asked a simple question: Can Uber Ever Deliver? According to Horan, based on a significant amount of data on the companys finances that has been released, the answer is no.

Horan argues that, in order for Uber to prove that its domination of the taxi industry will improve overall economic welfare, it would have to earn sustainable profits; provide service at a significantly lower cost; create new competitive advantages through major product redesigns and technology/process innovations; and, eventually, be incentivized to pass on its efficiency gains to consumers.

This hinges on an autonomous driving fleet. Despite optimistic overtures from automakers and self-driving car start-ups, the likelihood of that coming to fruition, if ever, is decades away. Ford has an optimistic plan to roll out fully-autonomous cars by 2021, for example, but they would be limited to use in a geo-fenced area.

Kalanick himself has said the development of self-driving cars is existential to Uber. Labor drives up operating costs; removing 160,000 drivers from the equation makes it a lot easier to balance the books. Though Uber has a reported $11 billion war chest stowed away, by burning through billions at a rapid clip, the path and timeline to becoming a driverless car company however that would materialize is muddled.

Even then, Ubers likelihood of success appears slim.

If you put driverless cars totally aside, the near-term future of Uber is the question of whether they could succeed in establishing a reasonably secure quasi-monopoly position in the United States and other large developed country markets before the cash runs out, Horan said in an email to Jalopnik. This is certainly possible but by no means certain. If yes, cash flow would improve considerably. If no, cash flow problems could get worse as the world becomes increasingly aware that it will never generate sustainable profits in its core business. Kalanick said that Uber had an existential need to succeed in driverless cars. This suggests his optimism about taxi profitability is not what it used to be. And at the rate its going, Uber could crash and burn through its stockpile of cash by the end of the decade.

Like a lot of Silicon Valley companies, Uber has survived on the backs of wealthy investors that have propped it up, despite eye-popping losses for several years. Horans analysis found that Uber has maintained operating losses of $2 billion a year, surpassing any start-up in history, with a negative 143 percent profit margin. Thus Ubers current operations depend on $2 billion in subsidies, funded out of the $13 billion in cash its investors have provided, he wrote.

Further, Horan found that Uber passengers fares only covered 41 percent of the actual trip cost, suggesting it charges far-too little for fares. Even public transit systems, long lambasted for being money-losing ventures, perform better: for instance, fare revenue for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, which serves the nations capital, accounts for 47 percent of its operating costs.

Uber ... was using these massive [investor] subsidies to undercut the fares and provide more capacity than the competitors who had to cover 100 percent of their costs out of passenger fares, Horan wrote.

If a monopoly is the key to success, its hard to figure how Uber can achieve total dominance. In the third quarter of 2016, for instance, Uber lost $800 million, according to The Information, a tech news site. Its chief rival, Lyft, is backed by General Motors and recently secured market share gains against Uber in significant U.S. markets, the site said, adding that Lyfts continued relevance in the U.S. has changed the math for Uber in terms how much it projected it could profit from developed markets in the next few years.

Steven Hill, a former fellow at the New America Foundation think tank, who has regularly criticized Uber, said the company has been successful only because taxi service has kind of sucked.

I think ride-sharing may survive, but Uber may not, said Hill, who published a book on the so-called gig economy called Raw Deal: How The Uber Economy Runaway Capitalism Are Screwing American Workers.

Because the other thing thats really bedeviling Uber: instead of just focusing on being a good taxi company for the digital age finding the way, a sweet spot, to make that work, its blowing all sots of money [on] self driving-cars and China and now India. The company just so much reflects the megalomania of Travis Kalanick and whatever he thinks hes doing.

I mean, seven out of 10 silicon valley startups fail, Hill went on. Theyre producing a product or service that no one necessarily wants to buy at the cost you can produce it for. Capitalism 101, right? So thats what were seeing with Uber. At this moment, it does not appear that Uber is able to produce a service that customers will pay enough more to make it sustainable.

Its unclear in what markets Uber may be turning a profit, if any at all. The company reportedly said it wanted to achieve profitability in the second quarter of 2016, and it claimed at the time it had reached that goal in the U.S. and Canada. But by December, according to Bloomberg, Uber was losing money again in the U.S., to the tune of $100 million per year.

Its also striking that Uber tapped Wall Street banks for a billion dollar loan by convincing several financial institutions to focus only on its nearly $70 billion valuation, and not operating losses in certain markets. According to Reuters, regulators at the Financial Reserve were bothered by the loan because the banks carved out Ubers more mature operations from the rest of the business.

Thats a vague statement, but Reuters said the regulators scrutiny was not a surprise because it is rare for young, unprofitable technology firms to tap the leveraged loan market which is traditionally restricted to companies with long histories of generating cash. (The reserve declined to release any documents related to the loan in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, saying: Such information, including any statement confirming or denying that any such information exists, would constitute a disclosure of confidential supervisory information and thereby was exempt from public release.)

Again, its commonplace for venture capitalists and early stage investors to fund operating deficits. The belief is that the company is going to grow fast enough and that, with enough growth, its going to turn profitable, and its going to turn highly profitable, said Gordon, the University of Michigan business professor.

A common comparison to describe Ubers approach is Amazon, which lost money consistently over the first several years of its existence. As Horan notes, however, Amazons worst losses were $1.4 billion in its fifth year of operations, but shrank rapidly thereafter, while Ubers losses have been steadily growing and will be over $3 billion in its seventh year.

The problem with Uber, Horan argued, is that it doesnt have a powerful economy of scale that is, the savings in cost that are produced when production increases, particularly through fixed costs being spread out. Unlike Amazon, which had significant fixed costs, Horan said that 85 percent of Ubers costs are variable.

Uber cannot expand into new markets at very low cost since it faces unique driver recruitment, political lobbying and competitive marketing challenges in each city, Horan said.

Gordon said thats why the typical approach by venture capitalists with Uber probably wont work.

They dont have an economy of scale, he said. So, every day, venture capitalists fund loss-making companies, but not one [with] a model you cant see how its going to flip twice as many rides that you keep losing money on. Youre not going to start making twice as much money because youre doing twice as much rides. Its not like a factory [with fixed costs].

Maybe Kalanick knows something we all dont. Maybe Uber has a secret team of genius scientists wholl surpass all expectations of driverless cars and, somehow, have a fully-automated fleet of vehicles for the company to use everywhere within a few years. Maybe billionaire investors are actually fine with propping up a money-losing venture into perpetuity.

But until Uber can prove it has found a sustainable modelor, perhaps, stop the investor leaks of its financialstheres little to suggest it has the bandwidth to survive. Whether its sold, drastically shrinks its market footprint, or just outright shutters, its untenable for Uber to exist long term as the tech juggernaut it is today.

Kalanick has pushed an enterprise on little more than a grandiose bet: that Uber could exist on a playing field of its own with few regulations, carving a path to financial salvation by dominating the taxi market simply through the sheer force of investors with bottomless pockets. It isnt working.

Excerpt from:

Uber Is Doomed - Jalopnik

Posted in Atlas Shrugged | Comments Off on Uber Is Doomed – Jalopnik

A Libertarian View of CPAC: Part One – Being Libertarian

Posted: at 6:59 pm

The first proper day of events at the 2017 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) was underway on Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at the Gaylord resort in Maryland. Being Libertarian was there on Media Row, representing an all-too-scarce libertarian presence alongside the mainstream media outlets that normally frequent these events.

But then something very unexpected happened: CPAC was friendly. It was friendly to us libertarians; it was friendly to minority activist groups who still consider themselves conservative; it was friendly to LGBT rights and non-federal intervention. In other words, the first day of events at CPAC proved to be much more libertarian-ish (as Dr. Rand Paul would say) than ever anticipated. Perhaps that was because we simply knew where to look, but either way, the mainstream-pushed image of the typical right-wing zealots unwilling to hear other viewpoints fades quickly upon further investigation of this conference.

At The Hub, which is essentially CPACs equivalent to Comic Con for political nerds, the many many booths of the participating organizations complete with all their wonderful, unique swag were lined up for mass consumption. There were think tanks such as the Capital Research Center offering internships, colleges such as Hillsdale advertising their intensive academic programs and fellowship opportunities, and newspapers like Campus Reform empowering students to bring free speech issues on their respective college campuses to light.

But in addition to these usual elements to a conservative conference, there were other groups being represented here that might have been less wise to bet on showing up: there was a booth dedicated to giving conservative atheists a voice; there was a booth dedicated to members of the LGBT community who understand and embrace the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution for their protection; and there was even a small group of Republican transgender activists at CPAC raising awareness of the fact that trans people are not delusional, nor do they have to be exclusively liberal.

One such activist, Jennifer Williams, was upstairs on the main event floor housing the Potomac ballrooms. She was proudly sporting a GOP elephant pin sportingthe trans rights colors, and holding up a sign that read: Proud to be Conservative. Proud to be Transgender. Proud to be American. #SameTeam. And she was doing all of this while also being wrapped in the dont tread on me me flag. When asked her opinion on the relationship between the GOP and trans people in America, Williams pointed out that while there was still work to be done, she was confident that the more the trans community raises awareness about its plight and perspective, the less alien trans people will seem to traditional conservatives in America. Williams believes in a truly free United States in which ones sex, gender, or creed does not dictate ones politics, and where all people are free to express themselves politically however they feel right doing so.

James Spiller, a general attendee who seemed to support Williamss cause,spoke to us about how understanding trans people in many ways is the final step toward bridging the gap between liberal and conservative voters on the social front. He pointed out, rightly, that upon receiving hormone treatment, trans athletes bodies transform into the body type of their borne-in gender (i.e. a trans woman on hormones loses muscle mass and experiences slight realignment of bone structure, meaning she is not unfairly advantaged against her biologically female cohorts). Spiller also cited the fact that by pointing this out, both liberals and conservatives will learn very real truths that will bring the two groups closer to an understanding. For instance, in addition to conservatives realizing the transformative effect of hormone treatments, liberals might also have to acknowledge that there are genuine mental and physical differences between men and women than a transgender persons transition could help to highlight, and therefore unveil the real reason for the gender pay gap: women and men approach life, work, etc. differently from one another, make different choices, and have different frames of mind, so naturally different choices will be made in the workforce leading to different rates of pay.

Williams, while she didnt comment directly on Spillers points, did seem to share the outlook that many liberals claim to understand trans people just to virtue signal, but that they do not own concepts like compassion and social justice conservatives can display it, too. I did not vote for Trump, Williams admitted. I was a Kasich supporter. But I would have voted for Trump had New Jersey been in play at the time. But she clarified that she does hope Trump continues to support the LGBT community, and that any reversal on the issues would feel like a slap in the face to her community.

This point was touched upon later in the day during the Steve Bannon speaking event, in which he and fellow presidential aid Reince Priebus explained that President Trump still supports LGBT rights, as well as the lack of authority for federal overreach on such matters, and is therefore leaving the trans bathroom issue to the states. While much of the mainstream media has been reporting this stance as a reversal on trans rights, its actually quite consistent with the small government conservative and libertarian viewpoint. Leaving the bathroom issue to the states while still explaining ones personal views in support of trans people is, through this lens, not a contradiction, and is still very much a pro-LGBT position for a Republican president to have.

And the best part of all of this was that the entire room erupted with applause at this statement. Let that sink in: an entire ballroom full of conservatives and Republicans cheered on a trans rights issue. And the conference itself let atheists, gays, transgenders, and other minority groups through its doors in the name of liberty, freedom of expression, and fellowship. If you are a conservative, you are welcome at CPAC, regardless of any other aspect of your person that might not historically line up with the perceived norm. That is the message CPAC 2017 has chosen to convey. And I frankly hope that sentiment continues. As our new acquaintance James Spiller noted, true understanding is the only way the lefts claim to social and intellectual superiority is going to be curtailed.

Well, to be fair, there was one minority group that CPAC chose to discriminate against: white supremacists. Alt-right leader and white nationalist Richard Spencer attempted to crash the event (much like he had done with short-lived success at the International Students for Liberty Conference last week), but was made short work of by event organizers and hotel security. Racism, it seems, has finally run its course with the Republican Party and the conservative movement as a whole.

Yeah, I see the fuck face, one CPAC attendee could be overhead saying when Spencer first came on the scene. It was established that it is okay to punch Nazis, right? While back at the spot on the convention floor where Miss Williams was waving her no tread flag, an elderly gentleman walked up to her, shook her hand and said: I dont quite understand, but Im trying to.

No, the modern conservative movement isnt perfect. And no, we should not drop our guard on the frontier of looking at it critically. But we also must be mindful that, just as the older man shaking Williamss hand said, it is trying. It is trying to branch out and finally be the all-inclusive, anti-big government movement it has long claimed to be but never quite delivered on. And that effort should be commended. We should continue to hold the conservatives and the GOP accountable for continuing that, of course (and Bannon himself said at his event that the American people should hold the Trump administration accountable as well), but for now, this is more than expected, and pleasantly surprising. Especially for libertarians.

This post was written by Micah J. Fleck.

The views expressed here belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect our views and opinions.

Like Loading...

Read more here:

A Libertarian View of CPAC: Part One - Being Libertarian

Posted in Libertarian | Comments Off on A Libertarian View of CPAC: Part One – Being Libertarian

White nationalist Richard Spencer attempts to troll Libertarian conference and is promptly rejected – TheBlaze.com

Posted: at 6:59 pm

According to Reasons Robby Soave, white nationalist and alt-right leader Richard Spencer attempted to crash a Libertarian gathering in Washington D.C., but after a heated argument with one of its famous attendees, Spencer was escorted out.

The incident happened Saturday night during 10th annual International Students for Liberty Conference at thethe Marriott Wardman in Woodley Park where the event was being held. Spencer reportedly attempted to host an unscheduled and unwanted conversation at the bar of the hotel regarding his pro-white nationalist views with attendees.

According to economist and author Steve Horowitz, the group Hoppe Caucus a group of alt-right libertarians named after philosopher Hans-Hermann Hoppe intended to bring Spencer to the hotel at the same time as the ISL conference as an intentional troll, even including a sign that saidRichard Spencer ISFLC 17.

Soave gives more details of Spencers time at the hotel, and his inevitabledeparture.

Eventually, Jeffrey Tuckeran influential libertarian thinkerconfronted Spencer and made clear to the alt-right provocateur that he did not belong at ISFLC. Some shouting ensued, and hotel staff intervened. Shortly thereafter, Spencer left.

Its not completely clear whether Spencer departed of his own accord: he seems to think he was forced to leave, while others say he asked security to see him out safely, even though he was in no danger. But it hardly matters: the Marriott Wardman hotel is private property, and should enjoy the absolute right to evict irksome and unwelcome guests from its premises.

Horowitz says that when conference attendees heard Spencer was at the bar, and number wentto confront him. At first there was an attempt at rational discussion, but as the crowd grew in size, and the shouting match between Spencer and Tucker grew heated, the hotel staff saw fit to kick everyone out of the bar. Spencer reportedly asked to be escorted out for his own safety, though Horowitz denies that Spencer was ever in any danger.

You can watch video of the exchange between Spencer and Tucker below:

One common theme many of the Libertarians discussing this incident share is that Spencer, and the alt-right are not welcome amongst the Libertarians. As the Libertarians of SFL demonstrated, and Soave writes into words, the incident should make abundantly clear that the alt-rights racism is incompatible with the principles of a free society. Libertarianism is an individualist philosophy that considers all people deserving of equal rights. In contrast, Spencer is a tribalist and collectivist whose personal commitment to identity politics vastly exceeds the lefts.

As well, the SFL President Wolf von Laer said in a statement that his organization did not invite Spencer, and that they reject his hateful message and we wholeheartedly oppose his obsolete ideology.

Read more:

White nationalist Richard Spencer attempts to troll Libertarian conference and is promptly rejected - TheBlaze.com

Posted in Libertarian | Comments Off on White nationalist Richard Spencer attempts to troll Libertarian conference and is promptly rejected – TheBlaze.com