The Pacific Research Institute will present a special San Francisco advance screening of Atlas Shrugged 3, on September 10, 2014, at the Metreon AMC Theater, San Francisco. For more details click Bay Area Events on our Main Menu.
So why is the Pacific Research Institute doing this? Their motto provides the best answer: “The Pacific Research Institute champions freedom, opportunity, and personal responsibility by advancing free-market policy ideas.”
Few stories represent such ideals better than Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged. Few stories extol the virtue of a commitment to truth better than Atlas Shrugged. These days, when we are told “You didn’t build that,” we might want to give thought to a conversation between two protagonists in the book:
“If you saw Atlas, the giant who holds the world on his shoulders, if you saw that he stood, blood running down his chest, his knees buckling, his arms trembling but still trying to hold the world aloft with the last of his strength, and the greater his effort the heavier the world bore down upon his shoulders-what would you tell him to do?"
"I . . . don't know. What . . . could he do? What would you tell him?
On August 26, 2014, Burger King announced its move to Canada – it shrugged. How many producers and job creators will follow, no matter how many laws anyone passes to prevent so called corporate inversions? How much taxation, militarization, and derision can hard-working common folk take before finding ways, and we hope peaceful ways, to shrug off their burden?
Make this screening of the end of the Atlas Shrugged Movie Trilogy a fun, truth-seeking event with family, friends, and fellow liberty-lovers!
November 4 ELECTION DAY
October 28 Last Day to Request Vote-By-Mail
October 20 Last Day to Register to Vote
October 6 Early Voting at City Hall Begins
October 6 Mailing of Voter Pamphlets
San Francisco voters will have a chance to make their voices heard during the upcoming consolidated general elections. As always, the Libertarian Party of San Francisco urges voters to acquaint themselves with the issues and the candidates, consider not only the benefits they might perceive in promises made but also the unintended consequences of those promises, and vote!
As a lone Libertarian voice in an utterly progressive city, we endeavor to call attention to unintended consequences, and we ask the questions that need to be asked,
How many laws are too many laws, before personal initiative is killed?
Can we legislate away natural economic forces to achieve political outcomes?
Is people’s growing dependence on government a good thing?
What is the acceptable level of verbal or physical threat or of force to impose laws?
What do words such as “wage theft” or “transit related improvements” used on the ballot proposals mean?
Who is stealing what from whom?
We point to consequences and we ask such questions in ballot arguments we submit every election season. Our unpaid volunteers, none of them politicians and all of them dedicated Libertarians, write these arguments after carefully studying the ballot proposals.
LOCAL BALLOT MEASURES:
For the November 4, 2014 elections, three of the Libertarian Party of San Francisco ballot arguments won the chance to appear in the San Francisco voters’ pamphlet, so we hope you will take the time to read our point of view in the Official Opponents Arguments for the following ballot proposals:
Proposition C – Children’s Fund
Proposition E – Tax on Sugar-Sweetened Beverages
Proposition G – Additional Transfer Tax on Residential Property Sold Within 5 Years of Purchase
In addition to ballot arguments, our volunteers have summarized each ballot proposal, and made voter recommendations. We will post these on this website shortly after Labor Day.
The San Francisco November 4, 2014, ballot will once again be sheets long and rife with factions. This city seems to have a talent for whipping up divisiveness. “Transit First!” but blockades impede the development of a variety of transit, such as company-provided buses. “Walkable Cities!” but endless legislation taxes and regulates neighborhood small businesses to death. “Transportation Justice!” but policies ignore significant population sectors, such as working seniors (yes, lots of them in today’s difficult economic environment) who find it difficult or impossible to walk, bike, or take the bus to work.
Bonds to finance transportation should be of special concern to voters. Section 8A.105. Municipal Transportation Fund establishes “a fund to provide a predictable, stable, and adequate level of funding for the Agency, which shall be called the Municipal Transportation Fund. The fund shall be maintained separate and apart from all other City and County funds. Monies therein shall be appropriated, expended, or used by the Agency solely and exclusively for the operation including, without limitation, capital improvements, management, supervision, maintenance, extension, and day-to-day operation of the Agency…” We Libertarians continue to encourage City leaders to take such funds seriously. As things stand, revenues are not prioritized to fund basic City functions, and expensive bonds are used to do so.
Also, we would like to offer some thoughts on the proposed measures relating to transportation that are as of today, August 3, listed on the San Francisco Department of Elections website. We say “as of today,” since measures have been popping up and disappearing (at what cost?!) as the Mayor and Supervisors carry on their own fisticuffing. Please feel free to contact us anytime with your own thoughts. Click “Contact Us” for our email addresses and telephone number.
San Francisco Board of Supervisor John Avalos, along with co-signing Supervisors David Campos, Eric Mar, and Jane Kim, sponsored the above proposed resolution. The Board voted on July 8, 2014, to postpone a decision. This proposal has been around since September of 2013, when Supervisor David Campos urged the Board to adopt a similar measure. You can see our analysis of that 2013 proposal in our article, Supervisor Campos to Explore Underwater Property Eminent Domain.
The idea of seizing underwater mortgages from private lenders is not going away. To the contrary, according to what Supervisor Avalos indicated during the meeting of July 8, he is looking forward to working with the rest of the Board, the Controller’s Office, and the City Attorney to craft a Joint Powers Authority Ordinance to be introduced later in 2014 – note the reference to an ordinance, not a mere resolution.
The forging ahead with this proposal is occurring in spite of investors giving every indication that they stand ready to flood every entity involved with lawsuits. Wells Fargo, Deutsche, and Mellon banks have already sued, although, as the court decided, prematurely, since the plaintiffs had not yet been harmed. No doubt, everybody will be back in court as soon as any actual seizing of mortgages is attempted!
Although these investors are powerful corporations, they are not voters, upon whom Supervisors depend at election time. Therefore, as always, we encourage voters - ordinary citizens - to get acquainted with the issues, contact their government representatives, and vote wisely.
File No. 140709 starts out by proposing that San Francisco commend the City of Richmond for “their work on creating a Local Principle Reduction Program…” – emphasis ours – and gets worse with each “Whereas.” Here are our primary concerns with Supervisor Avalos proposal:
Applies only to homeowners who are still making payments on their mortgages. It does not apply to borrowers who are no longer able to pay, and are truly facing foreclosure.
Applies only to securitized mortgages. Traditional mortgages still being held by original lenders are not included, no matter how underwater they are.
The June 3, 2014 California Primary Elections are pretty much behind us. Visit the Secretary of State website at http://www.sos.ca.gov/ for results so far if you have not done so already. In San Francisco, the status quo remained the status quo: Democrat candidates won handily over all other candidates, and voters approved yet another bond measure without requiring establishment of an on-going capital improvement fund.
San Francisco’s Congressional District 12 did avail itself of one ray of hope for individual liberties and fiscal prudence by awarding John Dennis 12.1% of the vote. Against Nancy Pelosi’s status quo vote of 73.6%, John Dennis’ 12.1% does not seem impressive; but it is, since it put Dennis in second place, affording him under the new Top Two rule a spot in the General Elections ballot. Therefore, the Libertarian Party of San Francisco will continue to support this libertarian Ron Paul Republican through the November General Elections.
Now on to plans for the November 4, 2014 General Elections! As always our focus will be on local ballot measures, a number of which are complex and from our perspective controversial; see the San Francisco Department of Elections website http://www.sfgov2.org/index.aspx?page=2969 . We plan to have some articles about these initiatives on our website. Also, we will have ballot arguments on the voter pamphlet in keeping with our efforts to offer solutions that are based on the realities of the market, fiscal responsibility, and the benefits of smaller governments. As always we welcome everyone’s feedback, assistance, and monetary contribution. In hopes of receiving your help, we have established a Campaign Committee and placed a Campaign Contributions button on our website.