Archive for March 4th, 2011

I wish I could upload some more appealing pictures but that’s what days currently look like:

University of St.Gallen, library

Read Full Post »

Today the first Republican politician, Newt Gingrich, announced his campaign for the 2012 presidential election. Surprisingly there is still merely a list of other potential candidates but no actually announced campaigns. The list contains among others Donald Trump, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty, Mike Huckabee, Jon Huntsman, John Thume, and Sarah Palin. Regarding this selection it seems that in the 2012 election no one could hold a candle to president Obama.

The last (unfortunately) successful GOP candidate was George W. Bush and before getting his party’s nomination he won the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). This year Ron Paul managed to win this presidential poll for the second time in a row. His last victory fostered the Tea Party movement and contributed to the GOP’s success in recent elections.

In his speech, Paul again raised his well-known ideas of a libertarian economic policy and a restrained US foreign policy.

Admittedly, Donald Trump immediately sent out the common response to any of Paul’s successes in preliminary polls:

I think he is a good guy, but honestly, he has just zero chance of getting elected.

So, where’s the beef? Does the CPAC poll really matter? Most of the media denied the importance but with only few months left to start campaigns we will soon be able to verify their foregone conclusion.

Many observers claim that “eight” will the crucial number for the 2012 election campaign. If the rate of unemployment is below 8 percent, Obama will most certainly beat any GOP candidate. If not, a good challenger will have chance. Today, the jobless rate dipped to 8.9 percent, the lowest in nearly two years.

Read Full Post »

As Germany prepares for eliminating the draft (compulsory military service) it is quite worthwhile to look at the U.S. and their reason for switching from universal to voluntary military service. This is of particular importance since, up to now, no one has shown up with the crucial point that turned things around in America: the principle of individual freedom and the free markets.

You are a mercenary general and I am a mercenary professor, we are served by a mercenary lawyer, we are served by a mercenary doctor.

Of course there are several pros and cons of having a compulsory military service. However, most arguments in favor of the draft are deeply flawed and based on simple fallacies. Like the one that “people benefit from the experience made in the army or social service for the rest of their lives”. Those raising this argument should ask themselves why they believe they know better what is good for others than these people know for themselves. Maybe spending one year in military or social service proves in fact to be a worthwhile experience for some. But as a universal coercion it is strictly in contradiction with the idea of a free society.

Another argument is that military service is too important to let selection be done by the market. But what do you think is the difference between a soldier and a doctor? Both make decisions with life and death consequences. So why should the doctor offer his service voluntarily on a free market while the soldier is compelled to serve?

The simple fact is that many occupations are important but no one ought to be forced to do a job. Since a national defense is truly necessary and cannot be privatized, it should be a state business. But when it comes to employees, the army ought to seek voluntary workers just like any other company.

Read Full Post »