Im Kane Forever

Kane | 22 | Michigan | Libertarian some days, Anarchist others | Agnostic | organic omnivore

dirty-gunz:

cerebralzero:

A quick little video I shot today of all the LEO activity in the Commons.

What are they doing there?

"protecting our freedom"

Anyone who advocates deadly force upon someone who is nonviolent should never have such authority.

The IRS is going after a Ron Paul group, Campaign for Liberty, demanding their donor list. The group is refusing to comply saying there is absolutely no reason to provide such information to them.

This will have blowback. I imagine even dissenters of Ron Paul and the organization will see the absurdity of these demands. This will unite Libertarians and Conservatives due to the conservatives being scrutinized in a similar manner by the IRS.

An enemy of my enemy is a friend of mine.

Summertime and the livin’s easy. #tbt #KanesKingdom

Summertime and the livin’s easy. #tbt #KanesKingdom

sixpenceee:

As someone who wants to study the human consciousness I found this very interesting.

Scott Routley was a “vegetable”. A car accident seriously injured both sides of his brain, and for 12 years, he was completely unresponsive.

Unable to speak or track people with his eyes, it seemed that Routley was unaware of his surroundings, and doctors assumed he was lost in limbo. They were wrong.

In 2012, Professor Adrian Owen decided to run tests on comatose patients like Scott Routley. Curious if some “vegetables” were actually conscious, Owen put Routley in an fMRI and told him to imagine walking through his home. Suddenly, the brain scan showed activity. Routley not only heard Owen, he was responding.

Next, the two worked out a code. Owen asked a series of “yes or no” questions, and if the answer was “yes,” Routley thought about walking around his house. If the answer was “no,” Routley thought about playing tennis.

These different actions showed activity different parts of the brain. Owen started off with easy questions like, “Is the sky blue?” However, they changed medical science when Owen asked, “Are you in pain?” and Routley answered, “No.” It was the first time a comatose patient with serious brain damage had let doctors know about his condition.

While Scott Routley is still trapped in his body, he finally has a way to reach out to the people around him. This finding has huge implications.

SOURCE

(via allmarketsbecomeblack)

I started watching game of thrones recently. I haven’t been really attached to it until halfway through the first season. I’m nearly halfway through the second season and I’m hooked now. The final few minutes of every episode really draw you into the next. I found myself unable to stop watching it after an episode’s end.

Also, fuck Joffrey. That sadistic sociopath.

I agree with her sentiment, but not the sponsor. Tzm is a bunch of anarcho-communists who adhere to a central intelligence that would dictate the allocation of resources. I don’t see any advancement with the philosophy.

I agree with her sentiment, but not the sponsor. Tzm is a bunch of anarcho-communists who adhere to a central intelligence that would dictate the allocation of resources. I don’t see any advancement with the philosophy.

(Source: holaaitsshann, via lupuslavender)

runningrepublican:

plannedparenthood:

plannedparenthood:

It’s Equal Pay Day – a day that shows how far into 2013 women must work to earn what men earned in 2012. After all, women still make just 77 cents to a man’s dollar. This gender gap affects women (and their families) from all backgrounds, ages, and at all levels of education – and it’s unacceptable. 

Re-blogging because (unfortunately) this is still a thing.

Buckle up followers, we’re going on a wild ride that will likely get you hate mail, get me hate mail and piss off people across tumblr. Here we go!
 
So let’s make sure we’re all on the same page. We’re talking about equal pay for men and women mandated by law. I do not support this laws because they are based of a “gender wage gap” that is misleading and they make it tougher for women to actually get a job.
Consider the following:

While I don’t doubt that the intentions of those that support equal pay, they may have been either mislead by statistics presented to them to support this law and they may also be unaware of the unintended side effects that are associated with it. 
“One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” ― Milton Friedman
First let me approach the gender wage gap. There is a nugget of truth to this. Women do make 75% of what Men do, however this is not due to a sexist society but rather individual choices that men and women make. Men tend to major in high paying fields such as business, computer science and engineering. Women tend to major in Education, health care and social sciences; all of which tend to lead to lower paying jobs. This is also due to the fact that women tend to make career choices which would allow them to work part time if they choose to have children later in their careers. So we can see that the wage gap is not a result of discrimination but many factors such as human capital investment, career choices and education.
If you compare men and women with the same experience, education and productivity, some studies show women earn 98% of what men do and in some positions, women out earn men.
Women without children earn even more.
More evidence

Hold that thought! There’s more! I’m about to make the point that even if there was a gender wage gap, it would be detrimental to women, or any minority, to put equal pay laws in place.

Let me give you the following scenario assuming that the wage gap is due to sexism. 
 Two people are applying for a job, one is a man and one is a woman. The male and female are of equal productivity, skill, and education; practically identical in ability. The employer is sexist against women. If there is no equal pay law in effect, the employer has two options, hire the woman an attempt to pay her less than what he would pay the man for equal productivity, and risk losing her to another employer who is not sexist or hire the man at market value for his labor and forgo the opportunity to try to hire the woman at below market value. In either scenario, the employer is harmed by his sexism and attempt to pay her below market value. 
This means that without the these laws, if a woman is at equal productivity to a man, it will cost an employer more money to hire the man. This is something we should all be in favor of; making sexists pay extra for their sexism.
If the equal pay law is in place, the employer may hold sexist views still and find another way to not hire the woman however the real cost is for employers that do not want to risk hiring a woman at all. Equal pay laws make it extremely easy for women to sue if they believe their male counterparts are being paid more. Because of this risk, employers may not want to hire women at all or potentially separate their positions into male and female roles to circumvent the law. The law eliminates the extra cost that an employer would have to pay for his discrimination
TL;DR
Equal pay attempts to fix a problem that doesn’t exist and ends up making it less likely that they will be hired. 

runningrepublican:

plannedparenthood:

plannedparenthood:

It’s Equal Pay Day – a day that shows how far into 2013 women must work to earn what men earned in 2012. After all, women still make just 77 cents to a man’s dollar. This gender gap affects women (and their families) from all backgrounds, ages, and at all levels of education – and it’s unacceptable. 

Re-blogging because (unfortunately) this is still a thing.

Buckle up followers, we’re going on a wild ride that will likely get you hate mail, get me hate mail and piss off people across tumblr. Here we go!

 image

So let’s make sure we’re all on the same page. We’re talking about equal pay for men and women mandated by law. I do not support this laws because they are based of a “gender wage gap” that is misleading and they make it tougher for women to actually get a job.

Consider the following:

image

While I don’t doubt that the intentions of those that support equal pay, they may have been either mislead by statistics presented to them to support this law and they may also be unaware of the unintended side effects that are associated with it. 

“One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” 
― Milton Friedman

First let me approach the gender wage gap. There is a nugget of truth to this. Women do make 75% of what Men do, however this is not due to a sexist society but rather individual choices that men and women make. Men tend to major in high paying fields such as business, computer science and engineering. Women tend to major in Education, health care and social sciences; all of which tend to lead to lower paying jobs. This is also due to the fact that women tend to make career choices which would allow them to work part time if they choose to have children later in their careers. So we can see that the wage gap is not a result of discrimination but many factors such as human capital investment, career choices and education.

If you compare men and women with the same experience, education and productivity, some studies show women earn 98% of what men do and in some positions, women out earn men.

Women without children earn even more.

More evidence

image

Hold that thought! There’s more! I’m about to make the point that even if there was a gender wage gap, it would be detrimental to women, or any minority, to put equal pay laws in place.

image

Let me give you the following scenario assuming that the wage gap is due to sexism. 

 Two people are applying for a job, one is a man and one is a woman. The male and female are of equal productivity, skill, and education; practically identical in ability. The employer is sexist against women. If there is no equal pay law in effect, the employer has two options, hire the woman an attempt to pay her less than what he would pay the man for equal productivity, and risk losing her to another employer who is not sexist or hire the man at market value for his labor and forgo the opportunity to try to hire the woman at below market value. In either scenario, the employer is harmed by his sexism and attempt to pay her below market value. 

This means that without the these laws, if a woman is at equal productivity to a man, it will cost an employer more money to hire the man. This is something we should all be in favor of; making sexists pay extra for their sexism.

If the equal pay law is in place, the employer may hold sexist views still and find another way to not hire the woman however the real cost is for employers that do not want to risk hiring a woman at all. Equal pay laws make it extremely easy for women to sue if they believe their male counterparts are being paid more. Because of this risk, employers may not want to hire women at all or potentially separate their positions into male and female roles to circumvent the law. The law eliminates the extra cost that an employer would have to pay for his discrimination

TL;DR

Equal pay attempts to fix a problem that doesn’t exist and ends up making it less likely that they will be hired. 

(via johinza)

cartelgathering:

mylittlerewolution:

Did you know that you can make houses out of plastic bottles? By filling them with sand, and molding them together with mud or cement, the walls created are actually bullet proof, fire proof, and will maintain an comfortable indoor temperature of 64 degrees in the summer time.

And it’s not like there is any shortage on used plastic bottles out there. Here are some statistics from treehugger.com:

“The United States uses 129.6 Million plastic bottles per day which is 47.3 Billion plastic bottles per year. About 80% of those plastic bottles end up in a landfill!”

To build a two bedroom, 1200 square foot home, it takes about 14,000 bottles.

The United States throws away enough plastic bottles to build 9257 of these 2 bedroom houses per day! That’s just over 3.35 million homes, the same number of homeless people in America.

Many people in third world countries have taken up building homes out of plastic bottles, from Africa to Asia. Perhaps the trend will catch on in America and all of those bottles will stop ending up in the landfills. Wouldn’t they be better off housing the homeless? Kinda like all those empty houses scattered all over the country?

Perfect

(Source: spiritscienceandmetaphysics.com, via lifeshort-stuntit)

It’s telling of society that “natural” is often put in foods’ labels.