Category Archives: Transhuman News

The Act party looks set to reject the Government's new housing policy, which will make it easier to build more houses on land in cities. Photo / Mark Mitchell

The Act party looks set to reject the Government's new housing policy, which will make it easier to build more houses on land in cities.

Act leader David Seymour called the bill a "hollow stunt".

"The Auckland Unitary Plan has said for the last four years 420,000 additional dwellings are theoretically possible but prices went up 35 per cent - why? Because councils don't have the funding for the infrastructure and they'll do everything they can to stop development.

Act has yet to come to a formal position on the bill - Seymour was once able to take a position on things himself, but he said this would have to go to caucus.

It is unusual for Act, an historically libertarian party, to oppose a bill which will remove red tape for people wanting to develop land.

The bill will allow up to three homes of up to three storeys each to be built on most sites without the need for a costly and frustrating resource consent.

"I've got to go to caucus on these issues now," Seymour said.

Seymour said his opposition was on the grounds of principle and certainty.

"This is not so much deregulation, it is sweeping aside a system of rules that Auckland agreed to over a pretty tumultuous three or four years for the Auckland Unitary Plan, which already allows 420,000 additional dwellings," Seymour said.

Seymour disputed the idea that he was opposing the policy because of opposition to urban density from his leafy central Auckland seat of Epsom.

"That's a very cynical thing to say - my view is if we want to solve a very serious problem of housing affordability, those are real problems we need to solve.

"We've been thinking about this for years now, and planning law is part of the solution, but planning law alone is not going to solve this. If it did the AUP would have solved it years ago," he said.

National and Labour agreed to an historic truce on housing, agreeing to introduce and support the Housing Supply Bill which they say will see at least 48,200 and as many as 105,500 new homes built in the next five to eight years.

It is a significant political step for both parties, which face pressure from urban property owners who are unhappy with more housing being built in their neighbourhoods.

By both backing the bill, the parties have essentially agreed to not capitalise on that vote.

"Today is truly a historic moment for New Zealand: a time when our two major political parties stepped up together to give Kiwis the Right to Build," National leader Judith Collins said.

See the rest here:
David Seymour not keen on housing bill, promises he is still a libertarian - New Zealand Herald

Bernie Sanders wants better press coverage of the Build Back Better bill? Ask and you shall receive, Sanders. Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Peter Suderman, and Nick Gillespie detail the most egregious parts of this giant pile of potential spending. Plus we talk about the Jones Act, all on this Monday's Reason Roundtable.

Discussed in the show:

1:05: The Roundtable sets the record straight after the official White House Twitter account claimed the "Build Back Better Agenda is $0."

33:07: Weekly Listener Question: I am a Jones Act mariner. While I, and many other American merchant mariners, are pretty libertarian, the Jones Act is the third rail of the maritime industry and turns many mariners away from the libertarianmovement (Cato, Ronald Reagan, and John McCain are not popular among Jones Act Mariners). While I agree with many reforms, like removing the U.S. shipbuilding requirement for Jones Act (that is, domestic) trade, I do not agree with removing the cabotage rules for domestic trade. Airlines, trucking, and trains all enjoy cabotage protections for domestic trade, but it seems that the sights are always on the Jones Act unfairly and the American Merchant Marine. What say you?

39:03: William Shatner went to space!

44:20: Media recommendations for the week.

This week's links:

Send your questions to roundtable@reason.com. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

Today's sponsors:

Audio production by Ian KeyserAssistant production by Regan TaylorMusic: "Angeline," by The Brothers Steve

Read this article:
The Biden White House Is Lying About the Democrats' Spending Bill - Reason

Over the weekend my Morning Readings included a lesson that economists teach called the Cobra Effect. Jon Miltimore is the Managing Editor of the Foundation for Economic Education in Atlanta and his FEE.org is a highly respected conservative libertarian economic think tank. In his story you are about to read, he claims economists around the world speak often on The Cobra Effect.

You see, every human decision brings about consequences, intended ones and unintended ones, Jon writes. Unintended consequences are so common economists often call them Cobra Problems, after an interesting historical event in India that occurred when the British Empire tried to eradicate cobras, the deadly snakes, by putting out a bounty on them. (the unintended consequences won that one!)

In two weeks we are told CHI Memorial Hospital will fire any employee who has not been vaccinated with the COVID shots.

Yet if you feel we have mandate problems, read what Mr. Miltimore writes about Houston:

* * *

COMMENTARY: MASSIVE NURSES SHORTAGE HITS HOUSTON, WEEKS AFTER 150 UNVACCINATED NURSES AND HOSPITAL WORKERS WERE FIRED

by Jon Miltimore, writing on August 23, 2021

Jennifer Bridges knew what was coming when her director at Houston Methodist hospital called her up in June to inquire about her vaccination status. Bridges, a 39-year-old registered nurse, responded absolutely not when asked if she was vaccinated or had made an effort to get vaccinated. She was terminated on the spot.

We all knew we were getting fired, Bridges, 39, told CBS News. We knew unless we took that shot to come back, we were getting fired today. There was no ifs, ands or buts. Bridges was one of more than 150 hospital workers fired by Houston Methodist hospital.

All last year, through the COVID pandemic, we came to work and did our jobs, said Kara Shepherd, a labor and delivery nurse who joined Bridges and other workers in an unsuccessful lawsuit. We did what we were asked. This year, were basically told were disposable.

PLEASE SEND HELP NOW

Shepherd and her colleagues may be disposable in the eyes of hospital administrators, but they are perhaps not as easily replaced as she or Houston Methodist thought.

Two months after firing unvaccinated hospital staff, Houston Methodist is one of several area hospitals experiencing a severe shortage of medical personnel. Media reports say hospitals have reached a breaking point because of a flood of COVID-19 cases.

In an editorial published Tuesday, the Houston Chronicle said the 25-county hospital area that includes Houston had more patients in hospital bedsmore than 2,700than at any point in 2021. News reports make it clear that hospitals are struggling to keep up.

KHOU-11, a local news station, says medical tents have been erected outside of Lyndon B. Johnson Hospital but are vacant because of a shortage of nurses.

Please send help now, said Dr. George Williams, chief ICU medical officer for LBJ Hospital.

While most media reports focus on LBJ Hospital, reports also make it clear other hospitals, including Houston Methodist, are experiencing similar struggles. The Houston Chronicle says Harris Health System (which includes LBJ) is short some 250 nurses, while the University of Texas Medical Branch has requested an additional one hundred nurses to help address staff shortages at four hospitals.

Baylor St. Lukes Medical Center, a private Houston hospital jointly owned by Baylor College and a local healthcare system, said the hospital is definitely being impacted by the nurse shortage.

As for Houston Methodist, the hospital is reportedly struggling as wellalthough theyve yet to admit it publicly.

An internal memo at Houston Methodist Hospital said it is struggling with staffing as the numbers of our COVID-19 patients rise, the Chronicle reports.

Public officials are scrambling to address the shortage, which has created a massive patient backlog throughout the Houston area. More than a week ago, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott requested out of state assistance for the statewide crisis, including 2,500 out of state nurses. LBJ Hospital officials said those nurses have not yet arrived.

The metro-wide shortage of nurses reportedly came to light when an ER doctor emailed a state senator about the dire situation in hospitals.

The combined increase in volume from (COVID and) existing normal volume (and) nursing shortage has made this a terrible disaster at every ER and hospital in the city of Houston, the physician wrote, according to the Chronicle.

THE COBRA EFFECTS

Its unclear to what extent Houston Methodists decision to fire 150 unvaccinated medical workers exacerbated the nursing crisis. For perhaps obvious reasons, hospital officials have been mum on the issue.

What we know is that Houston hospitals that did not abruptly fire 150 employees struggled to deal with the COVID spike, and in some cases people died as a result. So, its safe to presume that Houston Methodists decision to fire 150 employees a few weeks before the Delta variant arrived in force didnt make the situation any better and probably made it much worse.

Some may be tempted to think Houston Methodist was able to quickly replace the workers they lost, but evidence suggests this is unlikely. Apart from the broader shortage, front line nurses are burned out, they say.

We are all tired of this; nurses are tired of this, Texas Nurses Association CEO Cindy Zolnierek wrote in a recent public letter.

That Houston Methodist hospital didnt intend to exacerbate its shortage of hospital staff goes without saying, but its also an important reminder about what economists call the Cobra Effect.

Every human decision brings about consequences, intended ones and unintended ones. Unintended consequences are so common economists often call them Cobra Problems, after an interesting historical event in India that occurred when the British Empire tried to eradicate cobras by putting out a bounty on them. (Can you guess what happened?)

When hospital administrators set their policyget vaccinated or lose your jobtheir goal was to increase vaccination rates of hospital staff. The unintended consequence was a shortage of nurses and other hospital workers during a deadly pandemic.

In June, Houston Methodists president, Marc Boom, sounded confident that his coercive methods were effective, noting that almost 25,000 of the health systems 26,000 workers were fully vaccinated.

The science proves that the vaccines are not only safe but necessary if we are going to turn the corner against COVID-19, Boom told employees in a statement.

Other Houston hospitals saw things differently. Two months before Houston Methodist fired its workers, Harris Health System officials announced they would not be requiring hospital workers to get vaccinated, noting none of the vaccines were fully approved by the FDA.

Americans will, of course, disagree about which CEOs approach was the correct one. The pandemic, after all, has been bitterly divisive because were deeply divided over this very question: should coercive means be employed to achieve certain desired healthcare outcomes, and if so, to what extent?

In 2020, political leaders around the world said yes to this question, and the results were disastrous. A year later, private companies are playing a different version of the same game: take the vaccine or get fired.

Like the lockdown champions of 2020, corporate leaders no doubt believe their action is moral, proper, and will achieve their desired result. But as the Cobra Effect reminds us, focusing strictly on desired outcomes and ignoring potential unintended outcomes is a good way to get bitten.

* * *

The Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) is an American conservative libertarian economic think tank. It is a member of the State Policy Network. Its mission is to promote principles of "individual liberty, free-market economics, entrepreneurship, private property, high moral character, and limited government". Headquartered in Atlanta, it was established 75 years ago. It is considered the oldest free market think tank in the United States.

royexum@aol.com

More:
Roy Exum: Beware Of The Cobra - The Chattanoogan

During bitcoins parabolic price increase this year, Twitter profiles with laser eyes suddenly emerged. Anons and celebrities, such as Elon Musk, added red lasers rays to their portraits and the hashtag #LaserRayUntil100k started to trend. As the hashtag indicated, the laser eyes were added as part of an internet ritual to increase bitcoins price to $100,000. But the laser eyes were only the latest expression of Bitcoins culture, which ranges from an idiosyncratic terminology (think HODL, number go up or nocoiner) to an emphasis on eating meat and lifting weights. Not surprisingly, critics cited the laser eyes as more evidence for Bitcoiners cult-like behavior.

But if we dismiss these cult-like rituals, we simply fail to understand their significance for Bitcoins adoption. Indeed, if we want to understand Bitcoin and its parabolic growth which, over 10 years, increased from zero to more than $1 trillion we have to recognize Bitcoins quasi-religious dimension, which reveals itself in the beliefs of some of the most committed supporters and their exegesis of Nakamotos code and writings.

Its the commitment and excessive enthusiasm of these developers and early adopters that have been driving Bitcoins development and adoption since its invention a decade ago. In other words, the evangelism of Bitcoin adopters which are often dismissed as believers, evangelists or cultists is an essential feature of Bitcoins technological diffusion.

Not just the online rituals of Bitcoiners but also Bitcoins genesis itself reveals a deep resemblance with religion. Similar to religion, Bitcoin has its own founding myth: it begins as an obscure and radically novel technology that was invented by a mysterious pseudonymous creator that has, later, completely disappeared.

One of the most salient features, of course, is the resemblance between Satoshi Nakamoto and religious leaders, such as Jesus Christ and his sacrifice for his belief. Whereas Christ died by crucifixion as a sacrifice to achieve atonement for sin, Nakamoto most likely sacrificed his estimated 1,148,800 bitcoin which never moved from the original wallet for his messianic, techno-libertarian vision of a decentralized alternative to fiat currencies and central banking.

Bitcoin itself the protocol with its hard-coded 21 million supply has, in turn, become a transcendent absolute beyond human control and manipulation that represents a universally valid and quasi-divine truth.

Similarly, the centrality of the white paper can be analogized to sacred scripture in religions. The mythologized absence of Nakamoto often referred to as Bitcoins immaculate conception has, in turn, stimulated competing exegeses of the white paper that aim to recover the true meaning of Nakamotos code and writings.

Over the past decade, incompatible interpretations of the white paper relating to technical features, such as block size limits, have triggered a series of so-called hard forks. Bitcoin Cash, for example, emerged in the summer of 2017 from developers disagreement about the block size and transaction throughput. The Bitcoin Cashfork bifurcated Bitcoin not only into two different protocols but also into splintered sects that are guided by different visions of Bitcoins future.

So-called Bitcoin maximalists, for example, envision bitcoin foremost as a form of digital gold, that is, a decentralized store of value. This view emphasizes bitcoin as a sound alternative to fiat currencies. Given bitcoins finite and asymptotic supply, supporters of this view which, because of its monetary network effects, consider bitcoin to be the only legitimate cryptocurrency believe that bitcoin represents a digital store of value. In contrast, proponents of Bitcoin forks, such as Bitcoin Cash, envisioned that Bitcoin will primarily facilitate individual small-value transactions.

Culturally, as a consequence of these bifurcating views of Bitcoin, different communities on Twitter, mailing lists and online forums have organized around conflicting interpretations of the white paper and original Bitcoin source code, which represent two of the most sacred objects of Bitcoin. Naturally, for some of the more radical believers in the original vision of Nakamoto, the creation of altcoins that is, cryptocurrencies that either directly copy Bitcoins source code or incorporate some of its technical or conceptual properties is, in Bitcoins eschatology, equalized to heresy. Not surprisingly, the heresy of attempting to clone Bitcoins immaculate conception requires some Bitcoin maximalists to excommunicate altcoins and their developers and supporters from Bitcoin-related forums, social media platforms and meetups.

As Bitcoin full-node operators choose which vision of Bitcoin they support by running the software that enforces the protocol rules, running nodes can be reinterpreted as one of the foundational ritual practices of Bitcoin. The ritual of running a Bitcoin node represents the social process that decides upon, implements and enforces a set of transaction and block-verification rules, which network participants can adopt. By adopting the same set of validation rules, network participants form an intersubjective consensus about what constitutes Bitcoin. Dissenting network participants which correspond to heretics can only deviate from this intersubjective definition of Bitcoin by hard forking the protocol. By upgrading a copied version of the Bitcoin software to a new set of transaction and block-verification rules, the protocol becomes compatible with their belief and interpretation of the white paper.

Analogous to religions, early disciples are critical in diffusing bleeding-edge technological innovations. For example, technology entrepreneur Wences Casares proselytized Nakamotos utopian prophecy among Silicon Valley venture capitalists. In the early stages of Bitcoin, a small group of die-hard believers, such as libertarian technologists and cypherpunks, started to experiment with the technology when it was still in its proof-of-concept phase. Early adopters then started to improve the Bitcoin software.

This extreme belief of early Bitcoin adopters, in turn, triggered the interest of early speculators and investors, which were, often, ideologically motivated to invest in the technology. It was this inflow of capital and interest that triggered the first Bitcoin bubbles in 2012 and 2013.

After the peak when bitcoin, for the first time, reached a price of more than $1,000 in November 2013 the bubble collapsed and interest decreased substantially. Eventually, bitcoins price bottomed and formed a plateau that attracted a new cohort of new believers and investors who appreciated the importance of the technology. Bitcoins price plateau persisted for two years before a new bubble gradually started to form in 2015. A new base of adopters has, over the prolonged bear market that lasted from 2013 to 2015, formed for the next iteration of the hype cycle. The next two bubbles, which, in 2017 and 2021, resulted in unprecedented hype and attention, attracted an even larger set of adopters.

These cycles of Bitcoin bubbles, which have given rise to accelerating prices and increasing media attention, have created a self-validating feedback loop that is continually reinforcing the belief and commitment of Bitcoin Core developers, entrepreneurs, or speculators.

Bitcoins history, which is punctuated by these fractally repeating and exponentially increasing series of bubbles and hype cycles, shows that the extreme commitment and quasi-religious belief in the technology have been critical for bootstrapping the network and cryptocurrency into existence.

Now, while the religious dimension of Bitcoin is fundamentally important in the process of technology adoption and diffusion, we obviously cant simply believe in Bitcoin for it to become successful. Money in a free market tends to converge on a single standard. In order for liquidity to gravitate to one cryptocurrency, its incentive design and protocol architecture must be vastly superior to any other competitor.

Bitcoin has objectively superior properties that are hard to replicate by altcoins. You can fork Bitcoin, but you cant copy, for example, its network effects, the long track record of network reliability, or the self-reinforcing reflexive feedback loops that drive Bitcoins price, liquidity and security.

But coupled with its technical properties, the extreme beliefs and commitments of core developers, HODLers and entrepreneurs have, over the last decade, boosted Bitcoins market cap from zero to more than $1 trillion, and the network from one user Satoshi Nakamoto himself to more than 16,000 nodes. After all, as the history of Christianity, for example, demonstrates, a group of committed believers can have quite an impact.

As investor Peter Thiel once remarked: The best startups might be considered slightly less extreme kinds of cults. The biggest difference is that cults tend to be fanatically wrong about something important. People at a successful startup are fanatically right about something those outside it have missed.

Its going to be interesting to witness what happens when more and more converts start to believe in the prophecy of Satoshi Nakamoto.

So far, the Bitcoin cult has been fanatically right.

Many thanks to Byrne Hobart and Michael Goldstein.

For a more detailed paper on the social dynamics of Bitcoin, see Tobias Huber and Didier Sornette, Boom, Bust, and Bitcoin: Bitcoin-Bubbles As Innovation Accelerators.

This is a guest post by Tobias Huber. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.

See the original post here:
The Prophecy Of Satoshi Nakamoto: Bitcoin As Religion - Bitcoin Magazine

MANCHESTER, NJ The 2021 general election is near. Here's a look at your options for voting this year, along with who's on the ballot in Manchester.

In Ocean County that includes voting at a polling location, either during the early voting period or on Nov. 2.

If you're among the 54,000 voters in Ocean County who received vote-by-mail ballots they were sent to anyone who voted by mail in 2016, 2017, 2018 or 2019 you can turn in your ballot at a secure drop box, mail your ballot back or hand-deliver it to your local board of elections. If you mail it back, it must be postmarked by Nov. 2.

There are about 400,000 voters in Ocean County, and the majority will be voting in person. Sample ballots for those voting in person were expected to go out by Oct. 20. They are available online on the Ocean County Clerk's website.

Early voting begins Saturday, Oct. 23, and ends Oct. 31, and will be from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. Mondays through Saturdays and 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sundays.

LOCAL RACES

Ocean County Commissioners: There are two seats up for election. Voters have seven candidates to choose from: Gary Quinn and Bobbi Jo Crea, Republicans; Philip Nufrio and Catherine Paura, Democrats; Dan Valentine and Rob Canfield, Libertarian Party; and Barry Bender, Green Party.

Manchester Township municipal races: There are elections for mayor and council this year, both for one-year unfinished terms. Robert Hudak and Robert Arace are seeking the one-year unfinished mayoral term, and Michele Zolezi and Joseph Hankins are seeking the one-year unfinished term on the township council

Manchester Township voters also are being asked to choose two members for the Board of Education. The candidates are George J. Cervenak III, Sasiya O.Omilanowicz, Mike Kelliher, and Nicole Sahlin.

Those looking for a drop box for vote-by-mail ballots can use any in Ocean County. There are drop boxes at the Brick Township Municipal Building at 401 Chambers Bridge Road. The box is located at the rear of the building near the police department entrance and is under surveillance 24/7.

The vote-by-mail ballots will be picked up daily and brought to the Board of Elections. All security measures will be followed when collecting and transporting the vote-by-mail ballots, officials said.

Voters wondering how their signatures are checked before the upcoming election can see the process for themselves.

NOTE: This article has been updated to correct that early voting begins Saturday.

Read the original here:
2021 Election In Manchester: How To Vote, Whos On The Ballot - Patch.com

ELIZABETHTOWN A report released last week by a nonprofit Libertarian-based think tank offers true information on the American Rescue Plan Act, and yet leaves out some important facts.

The Reason Foundation researched 142 reports filed by states, cities and counties and declared state and local governments have spent very little of the federal aid they allocated under the American Rescue Plan Act. On its website, Reason goes on to knock the Biden administration and lawmakers who cited urgency in passing $350 billion in emergency funding for state, local, and territorial governments.

Bladen County commissioners have a share of that money, and have recently been in discussions for appropriation. But there isnt necessarily a hurry.

County Manager Greg Martin, responding to questions from the Bladen Journal, wrote in an email, The deadline for obligating funds is December 2024 and deadline for spending funds is December 2026. The Board recently held a public hearing and received requests for funds. US Treasury has not released Final Rule regarding eligible uses of funds. The School of Government advises local governments to plan but wait for final rule. We will plan to determine uses of funds in the near future.

Bladen County was allocated $6,355,865 and thus far has received one-half, or $3,177,932.50. Martin said the county has used only $30,777.40 thus far, all for the purpose of COVID-19 sick leave.

These funds are not to be confused with prior relief funds for COVID-19, some of which came during the Trump administration.

Martin wrote in the email, Bladen County received $1,417,464.82 in Coronavirus Relief Funds. To date, $1,390,838.75 has been spent. The unspent funding of $26,626.07 is due to items ordered by the Town of White Lake being on back order. Funds are to be spent by December 31, 2021.

The Reason Foundations report trumpets that 97 percent of the funds the Biden administration was in a hurry to get and disperse have not been spent. It cited, for reasons the money has gone unspent, state and local governments seeing very minimal dips in 2020 revenue, and strings attached to the ARPA funds restricting how they can be spent.

The John Locke Foundation, a conservative-leaning think tank in Raleigh, recently documented nearly 90 percent of the $6 billion in COVID-19 relief funds sent to the state being unspent as of mid-July. At less than 2 percent unspent, Bladen County significantly bucks that trend.

This story authored by Alan Wooten of the Bladen Journal. Contact him at 910-247-9132 or awooten@bladenjournal.com.

Go here to see the original:
ARPA funding slow to go out, and in Bladen County theres a reasonable explanation for that - Elizabethtown Bladen Journal