Nanny State Tuesdays - Week 2

First up, we have Mayor Bloomberg and his push to get those evil sugary drinks banned from public consumption. "I would just like to push that from the consumer point of view and to force the consumer to hopefully move over to the less fattening drinks and everybody will be better off." If they can force you to do something like that, what else can they force you to do? It's kind of like the individual mandate in the AHCA (Obamacare) only on a more everyday level for your average citizen instead of an issue for evil corporations and religious organizations. Anyone remember WWII and how it just started with one small sector of the population (the Jews) before extending to everyone? Baby steps my friends...


Next up we have the UN (or more accurately an independent council in the UN) planning to tax US-based companies in order for them to reach audiences in other countries. Basically it will allow countries and their local companies the ability to tax American companies for providing content to their citizens. Those companies are already taxed for doing business in the country, but now it puts the power in the hands of local companies to determine the price of the goods and force the sending company to pay the fees to make up the difference in price, after doing all of the groundwork and creating the product. This does nothing for the consumer but provides free money to local companies, and thus their governments in the form of taxes. What a fantastic idea, lets just get businesses to stop doing business in your country, thus reducing revenue for EVERYONE and would most likely result in layoffs on our end as the company sees its profits drop.


Then there is the controversial Zimmerman case. Both George and his wife are being charged with perjury for not fully disclosing their finances. I have to wonder however, what does your finances have to do with a murder charge? Especially one with extensive evidence proving your version of events, including witnesses and video? It's a murder charge, not a con job or white collar crime, there was no theft of cash involved. The only money involved is the cost to the county for the case and investigative work required because the DA felt the need to fold to public pressure without sufficient evidence.

This just goes to show that our courts have a problem with items that are not involved whatsoever with the cases before them. It's information gathering without a reason except to try and pull a "gotcha" on private citizens that they feel should be jailed for not bending knee before them. There needs to be some kind of rules in place that requires information requested by the court to have to be related to the crime of the accused. If someone is charged with murder and it's not for something like insurance money or an inheritance there is no reason to request financial information unless the person is requesting a public attorney (which the story doesn't mention).


Ok, here's a WTF... the town of Middleborough, Massachusetts has passed a $20 fine for swearing in public. Now, I'm not a huge fan of swearing in public (I've been really trying to reduce my swearing period), but fining people now? Seriously? You going to charge a guy $20 if he drops something on his foot and swears in response? Is your town really so hard up for cash that this is necessary? WTF.