Archive for the ‘Libertarian’ Category

Election Day approaches as early voting numbers reach just above 400 – Ruidoso News

As Election Day approaches in Lincoln County, the number of voters utilizing early and absentee voting opportunities was slow but steady.

The Office of the New Mexico Secretary of State reported that 441 Lincoln County voters had cast an early or early in-person absentee ballot.

Of those voters, 266 were Republicans while 126 were Democrats. Forty-six voters declined to state a party affiliation; the remaining voters identified as Libertarian or self-identified as "other."

On Oct. 27, that number was 364, with Lincoln County Republican voters still outpacing Democrats in casting ballots.

More: Your guide to early voting in Lincoln County: 2021 regular local election

More: These candidates are running in the 2021 local election in Lincoln County

Only 16 Lincoln County residents hadutilized same day registration by Oct. 27 and only 92 requests for absentee ballots had been received, according to the data.

By Oct. 28 only two additional voters had opted for same day registration.

Local elections are nonpartisan.

More: 300 early votes cast in Lincoln County

On ballots Nov. 2 is the mayoral seat in the Village of Capitan where Tiffany Menix, Lilly Bradley and Ron Lowrance each sought the position.

Councilor positions are open in Carrizozo and the Village of Corona, while school board positions are open in Capitan, Hondo, Corona, Carrizozo and Ruidoso.

The Village of Ruidoso opted-out of the Local Election Act which aligned local elections with other state and national races.

Formore information on voting contact the Lincoln County Clerk's office at 575-648-2394, extension 6 or visit the website atwww.lincolncoountynm.gov.

Election Day votingoccurs at any of these voting centers in the county from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Nov. 2. Any registered voter may vote at any of the voting locations.

Check your voting registration and view a sample ballot online atNMVote.org.

Jessica Onsurez can be reached at jonsurez@gannett.com, @JussGREAT on Twitter at by phone at 575-628-5531.

Go here to read the rest:
Election Day approaches as early voting numbers reach just above 400 - Ruidoso News

Glimmers of a sane republic – Newsday

Listen clearly to these authentic American voices.

"The main problem is politicians. They divide and conquer," says a Black woman, 75, from Georgia.

"I think we all share this desire that were not going to give up on the Great Experiment," says a white woman, 49, from Maryland.

"Being uneducated, I think that's the number one reason we get divided," says an Asian American man, 40, from California.

These reflections suggest that for all the fierce factionalism, and the signs of fraying and alienation, and the exhibitionist protests, the voices of ordinary people across the United States remain very recognizable.

The statements along with others more negative, spiteful and fatalistic come from voters interviewed for a Siena Research Institute survey of 6,077 Americans from April 23 to May 3.

Sentiments like these might well have been heard from past generations of Americans. They tell us that we the electorate have not all lost our heads quite yet even if the paranoid and extreme style of engagement today hints otherwise.

Be the first to know who they are endorsing this election season.

By clicking Sign up, you agree to our privacy policy.

Core political values survive in the collective consciousness across age, income and racial lines. People still affirm the ideals of liberty, equality and progress, the poll found. That makes sense, since activists of all kinds these days like to call themselves libertarian or progressive and often evoke equal rights under the law.

Siena pollster Don Levy says that as politically divided as we are, "America still holds a common language consistent with our founding philosophy."

Reconciling those goals with specific policies and behaviors is, of course, the hard part, as is forever the case in America.

Billed as the American Values Survey, and published first in Newsday, Sienas work finds 35% of the electorate to be left of center, 34% right of center, and 31% centrist, having a mixed set of views.

The left-right categories are shaped by responses to hot issues: voting, abortion, banning assault weapons, and proposed citizenship for immigrants.

For those given to fretting about our degree of disagreement, some questions yielded strong majority opinions that suggest that a meaningful consensus can be reached if Congress and state and local legislatures take most people's views to heart.

Sixty-three percent support a path to citizenship for immigrants living in the country illegally. Eighty-four percent favor federal legislation that would both protect voting rights and make it easier to vote. Sixty-one percent favor a federal ban on assault weapons.

The question beyond the survey becomes why these popular actions cannot be taken. That's a matter of party expedience and government control, not illuminated in any poll, but apparent when you follow events in Washington.

Political definition and process dont fit checklists. We know from what we've seen beyond this survey that contrary to what their opponents may say, Republicans dont wish to be seen as creating unneeded hurdles to voting. And contrary to what GOP leaders claim, Democrats do not support "open borders."

There is plenty of space for productive political coalitions that sidestep some people's dramatic dreams of a new Civil War.

In interviews with 90 Long Island candidates of both major parties leading up to Election Day 2021 on Tuesday, the Newsday editorial board heard few assertions that could be called patently exotic or crazy. One could see in the candidates' exchanges where cohesive progress looked possible on taxes, police reform, criminal enforcement, and housing development.

The Siena survey's results illustrate at a glance how people can be discouraged from running for office these days by the unfair reputational abuse they may have to endure.

A 22-year-old Colorado woman, described as an independent, said: "I would say just in general this past election, people were so polarized and now you politically can't really speak what you believe without at least one person in the room deciding that they hate you just because you agree with this political candidate versus this one."

One problem that our enduring political values have not prevented is evident in a question from Siena that its pollsters should never have had to ask:

"Do you think that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump or not?"

A resounding majority of 67% in the tristate area said no, as did 56% nationally. That majority can only grow as the one-year anniversary of Trump's convincing defeat at the polls approaches. In the region, 10% were listed as "unsure," and nationally, 13% said that.

"Are we divided?" asks pollster Levy. "Yes. Do we share core values? Absolutely. Are we proud to be Americans? For the most part. Do we think our great experiment will weather this storm? Were somewhat hopeful, but concerned."

Maybe the mood of the country is moving a notch toward the politically pragmatic despite continuing performance art from those who live for their social media, video and vanity.

If the cultural and political weather changes, the web-driven miasma of political paranoia and random suspicion may not last forever.

The sooner it lifts, the better.

MEMBERS OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD are experienced journalists who offer reasoned opinions, based on facts, to encourage informed debate about the issues facing our community.

Visit link:
Glimmers of a sane republic - Newsday

Contested BOE races in Belleville and Nutley this November – Essex News Daily

BELLEVILLE / NUTLEY, NJ This election season is shaping up to be fairly quiet in Essex County, with few contested elections and foregone conclusions for some of the contested races. The biggest question on the ballot this upcoming Election Day, Tuesday, Nov. 2, is the choice for governor.

Democratic incumbent Gov. Phil Murphy, with running mate Lt. Gov. Sheila Y. Oliver, will be facing off against Republican challenger Jack Ciattarelli, with running mate Diane Allen. Also running for governor and lieutenant governor are the teams of Joanne Kuniansky and Vivian M. Sahner on the Socialist Workers Party ticket; Madelyn R. Hoffman and Heather Warburton on the Green Party ticket; and Gregg Mele and Eveline Brownstein on the Libertarian Party ticket.

There are also two state public questions for voters to consider; both concern gambling statutes. In the first question, voters are being asked to decide whether the state should pass a constitutional amendment to allow wagering on postseason college sport competitions held in New Jersey and competitions in which a New Jerseybased college team participates. The second question regards whether to allow organizations that are permitted to hold raffles to keep the raffle proceeds to support themselves.

Countywide, voters must elect the sheriff, a three-year term. Running for office are Democratic incumbent Armando B. Fontoura, who has been serving as Essex County sheriff since 1990, and Republican challenger Nicholas G. Pansini.

Residents in the 28th Legislative District must choose between Democratic incumbents and Republican challengers for state Senate and Assembly. The Democratic incumbents are Ronald L. Rice for state Senate and Cleopatra G. Tucker and Ralph Caputo for Assembly. Republican challengers are Frank Contella for state Senate and Monique Headen and Anthony DAngelo for Assembly. Rice has served as a state senator since 1986, and Tucker and Caputo have served as Assembly members since 2008.

In the 29th Legislative District, state Sen. M. Teresa Ruiz, the Democratic incumbent, is running unopposed; Ruiz has served in the state Senate since 2008. Running for the two state Assembly seats are Democratic incumbents Shanique Speight and Eliana Pintor Marin, and independent challenger Debra Salters, who is running under the slogan Salters for All. Speight has been an assemblywoman since 2018 and Pintor Marin since 2013.

The Belleville Board of Education race gives voters a lot of options, with six candidates running for two open seats. Incumbents Christine Lamparello and Nelson Barrera are seeking to reclaim their seats; Barrerra is running under the slogan Keep Progress Going. They will face challengers Nicole Coviello-Daddis under the slogan Bellevilles Children First, Tracy Williams under the slogan Together We Achieve, Lissa Missaggia under the slogan Excellence in Education and Ruben A. Rodriguez.

The Nutley Board of Education race also has a large number of candidates, with seven individuals running for just three open seats. Incumbents Kenneth J. Reilly, under the slogan Keep Your Promises, and Theresa Quirk are seeking reelection. Challengers are Nicholas Scotti under the slogan Nutley Families First, Jeffrey Polewka, Daniel Fraginals under the slogan A New Voice, Joe Battaglia and David Kay under the slogan Putting Kids First.

Election Day is Tuesday, Nov. 2, and there are multiple ways for county residents to vote, such as by mail, early in-person voting, via drop box and in person on the day.

Belleville Board of Education, Belleville election, Election Day, Essex County Election, FEATURED, NJ Election, Nutley Board of Education, Nutley election

View post:
Contested BOE races in Belleville and Nutley this November - Essex News Daily

Richard Thaler: ‘I became an academic because I’m not good at taking orders’ – Times Higher Education (THE)

In 2008, three professors were in Napa, California, to lead a one-and-a-half-day class for some tech industry types, titled A short course in behavioral economics.

Those attending included Jeff Bezos, the Amazon founder; Elon Musk, the PayPal and Tesla co-founder; Sean Parker, Facebooks first president; Evan Williams, the Twitter co-founder; and Salar Kamangar, then the YouTube CEO, now a senior executive at Google. The transcript of the class, published online, records that at one point, in a discussion on the psychology of scarcity and marketing strategies, Bezos felt moved to mention a famous strip club in Seattle which had the slogan 99 Beautiful Girls and 3 Ugly Ones. Musk interjected: You know it well?

One of the professors leading the class was Richard Thaler of the University of Chicago, a pioneer in the field of behavioural economics, who had just co-authored a book titled Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness with his then Chicago colleague Cass Sunstein. Thaler would go on to win a Nobel prize in 2017 for his work pre-dating the book.

The Silicon Valley students heard him explain how behavioural economics challenges the restrictive assumptions of traditional economics, which hold that all humans are unbelievably smart, and instead aims to incorporate lessons from psychology about how the mind works and how real humans think.

Thaler recalls subsequently emailing Bezos to enquire why Amazon was selling Nudge for the same 9.99 price in dollars, pounds and euros: He didnt reply, but the prices did change.

Amazon has shifted a good few units of Nudge since then and is now doing so with the updated final edition, published in August, of a work described in its blurb as one of the most important books of the twenty-first century. The nudges of behavioural science and economics are now being deployed by tech companies to determine the news we read, the products we buyand the human networks, online and in real life, of which we are a part, one academic has argued. Meanwhile, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development has counted 200 instances of nudge units worldwide being used to bring behavioural insights into public policy. Thalers work has also helped ensure that millions of people, in countries including the US and UK, are auto-enrolled in workplace pension schemes.

So just how did he achieve such extraordinary impact, and what social and political legacy might his work be leaving?

When youre studying economics, you find yourself studying this fictional creature, Homo economicusI just never met anybody like that, says Thaler on what led him to shape the field of behavioural economics.

Homo economicus, adds the Charles R. Walgreen distinguished service professor of behavioural science and economics at Chicago, could look at a dozen mortgages and immediately figure out which one is best, figure out how much to save for retirement, what career to choose, what spouse to pick. They never eat too much or drink too much. Theyre kind of weird.

Although Thaler wrote a very traditional thesis (at the University of Rochester), he found that the disconnect between economic theory and the reality of human behaviour kept troubling me. Eventually, in the mid-1970s, he stumbled on research by Israeli psychologists Daniel Kahneman, now professor emeritus of psychology and public affairs at Princeton University, and Amos Tversky, who worked at Stanford University until his death in 1996 (Kahneman subsequently won a Nobel prize, for having integrated insights from psychological research into economic science, especially concerning human judgment and decision-making under uncertainty). Thaler and Kahneman went on to become academic collaborators Kahneman also taught that Silicon Valley class in 2008, having led a similar event focused on psychology in 2007.

Although Kahneman and Tversky were psychologists writing for psychologists, Thaler realised that they had an insight that was really fundamental for economistsThe way people solve problems and in particular the way they deal with uncertainty yes, they make mistakes, but they are predictable mistakes. Just that sentence people make predictable mistakes made behavioural economics possible.

After working at Cornell University, Thaler moved on in 1995 to Chicago, despite the strenuous objections of leading figures of the famously orthodox Chicago School, who were rather fond of Homo economicus.

Thaler cites Max Plancks adage about science advancing funeral by funeral: I dont think I ever changed anybodys mind in economics. Once we did get a little bit of traction, my strategy was to corrupt the youth.I think the reason the field has taken off is largely due to the fact that very talented young scholars who are now middle-aged didnt find anything particularly heretical about thisMost of the economists under 45 at my institution think of behavioural economics as just part of the repertoire now.

So what nudged this New York City actuarys son to take on the mantle ofHomo academicus? The main thing he learned from his fathers career witha large insurance company, he says, was that I didnt want to be a company manIm a lousy subordinate that was the insight I had when I was a kid. I became an academic not because Im some sort of intellectual, but because Im not very good at taking orders.

An aversion to orders characterises Nudge, which has at its core a philosophy the authors term libertarian paternalism. Thaler and Sunstein use the example of a school cafeteria presenting its food and menus in a way that encourages kids to choose food that is better for them. The libertarian element of their thought reflects their belief that people should be free to do what they like and opt out of arrangements they dont like; the paternalistic element the idea that it is legitimate for choice architects, whether in governments or the private sector, to try to influence peoples behaviour in order to make their lives longer, healthier, and better.

A nudge alters peoples behaviour in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing [their] economic incentives like putting the fruit at eye level in a school cafeteria. Or, in the books best-known example, painting flies on to the urinals in the toilets at Amsterdams Schiphol Airport, which created a target that apparently improved mens accuracy and thus cleanliness (worth a shot at home for anyone with young sons).

In terms of where his work has had the greatest impact, Thaler singles out pension auto-enrolment something he had been banging the drum for since as far back as 1994, well before Nudge. The book uses this as a central example of how choice architects can help people make better choices by making sensible options the default: pension auto-enrolment is a way of getting people to save for their retirement, weighing against their mostly poor or lazy decisions not to enter a workplace scheme, but not compelling them to do so (workers can opt out after being auto-enrolled).

In the US, the federal government has encouraged companies to adopt this policy since 2006. The UK scheme, phased in by the government since 2008, has ensured that more than 90 per cent of eligible private-sector workers are now part of a workplace pension scheme.

Thaler says: I think 90 per cent plus freedom of choice is a pretty attractive combinationThese ideas, which were radical when they were introduced, are now considered part of best practices.

Boiled down, Nudge is a synthesis of academic papers from economics and psychology, many by other academics, explained in a folksy style for non-specialists, supporting an overarching argument on libertarian paternalism. Rohan Silva, an adviser to then Conservative shadow chancellor George Osborne when Nudge was published in 2008, read the book, bought a pile of them and put them in Conservative Party headquarters, and David Cameron [then Tory leader] picked one of them up. That was a nudge, says Thaler. He liked what he read and they put it in the Tory manifesto.

Meanwhile, in the US, Sunstein was hired by Barack Obama (a friend from his time as a fellow Chicago law professor) to run the US governments Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. That gave us two places to see how things might work, reflects Thaler. We certainly didnt do a lot of proselytising for the book, he adds. Out of the 200 nudge units around the world, in nations including Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Finland, Ive probably talked to five of them.

Nudge led directly to the creation of the UKs Behavioural Insights Team, or Nudge Unit, established as part of the Cabinet Office under the Cameron government, although now spun out into an independent company. That units work has looked at ways of encouraging people to pay their tax on time, increasing rates of organ donation and cutting the rate of reoffending among drivers caught speeding.

The existence of the UK nudge unit also led to behavioural science becoming an integral part of government decision-making during the pandemic: the units chief executive, David Halpern, is a member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, as are two other employees of the unit.

The OECDs tally ofmore than 200 nudge units in governments and NGOs is pretty amazing, says Thaler, especially considering that publishers were running away from us as quickly as they could when we were shopping this book.

Why the lack of interest? Lets just say that the phrase libertarian paternalism doesnt roll off the tongue, he replies. In fact, the title Nudge was suggested by one of the publishers who turned the book downIve offered to buy him dinner.

In addition to Thalers policy influence, theres his corporate influence, some of it maybe via that 2008 Silicon Valley class. Bezos referred to automated machine-learned nudges deployed by Amazon in a letter to shareholders in 2015.

The Silicon Valley students asked a lot of questions, Thaler says. Who knows what impact it had on any of them? But Amazon now has the largest economics department in the world. There are over 100 economists, PhD economists, that work at Amazon. I dont know how many of them are doing behavioural economics, but they are certainly running experiments all the time.

Perhaps there is a nudge influence in the way the Amazon website, for example, uses what the firm knows about customer interests, and their susceptibility to the opinions of others through reviews, to influence our choices.

Some people think of [Amazon] as some evil villainI think thats bit naive, Thaler says. If Amazon recommends things to me, its not in their interest to recommend things I wont like. He is aware of all the market power that is held by those large technology firms, but thinks they have all gotten where they are in part because they are very good at what they do.

Some critics would challenge that as simplistic. In an article for The New York Review of Books, mainly on the work of Kahneman and Tversky but also addressing Thalers, New York University philosopher Tamsin Shaw traced a line from behavioural science through to the commercialisation of preferences in the digital economy, and even to the psychological manipulation deployed in politics by Cambridge Analytica and by Donald Trumps successful 2016 presidential campaign. Shaw argued that behavioural change imposed on us through nonrational means results in a situation where the sources of influence that shape social behavior, markets, and politics increasingly become invisible and rationally inscrutable.

Thaler calls this a bit overwrought and ill-informed. I think we make clear in the final edition [of Nudge] that nudging can be done for good or evil. We didnt invent it, we just gave it a word, and we do not have many secrets that [notorious conman Charles] Ponzi had not deduced for himself.

Political critiques include a recent journal article byNicholas Gane of the University of Warwick characterising Thalers libertarian paternalism as neoliberal since it treats the underlying structure of life-choice as psychological rather than social in basis and thus as something that can be remedied through small behavioural interventions. It was also, under the Cameron government, partner to a state-shrinking austerity programme, Gane argues.

So is Nudge a political project?

We thought of it as a kind of third way, replies Thaler. Both he and Sunstein consider ourselves centrists and have gotten criticism from both left and rightWhich I view as a badge of honour. Our goal is to be practical.Its not really a political book.

However, Nudge says that when incentives and nudges replace requirements and bans, governments will be both smaller and more modest. A belief in small government is, of course, a political position.

New Statesman columnist Peter Wilby wrote after Thalers Nobel win that his premise is that theres nothing wrong with markets, only with people, and the states role is to make people fit for markets, not the other way round. If you use drugs, eat junk food or get into unsustainable debt, its not because of poverty, inequality or lack of hope but because of your behavioural flaws.

Thaler responds: I would say its impossible that the person who wrote that read anything I have ever writtenOne misconception is that behavioural economics is sort of a criticism of humans as a species, which is a really stupid argumentWe dont think people are dumb; we think the world is hard. Our goal is to make the world easier.

After winning a Nobel prize and becoming a senior adviser for retirement and behavioural economics at investment management firm Pimco in 2019, as well as co-founding Fuller & Thaler Asset Management (which manages about $17 billion in assets and describes itself as having pioneered the application of behavioral finance in investment management), Thaler has clearly reached a level where critiques arent going to affect him much.

Im always telling business people that the next revolution in business is in human resources, he says. He once introduced the general manager of a basketball team [at a companys] all-hands-on-deck meeting. I said, this guy has 15 quantitative analysts working for him and his job is to hire 12 people. You guys have 2,000 employees, how many [analysts] do you have? Why shouldnt every company be as smart about who they hire and how they train them as the smart professional sports teams?

The incredible reach of Thalers work comes down to a combination of working across disciplines; drawing insights from psychology into his own field of economics; writing in an accessible style; getting a snappy title from a publisher who turned down his book; reaching influential policy figures; and working at an elite university where a US president used to work.

Funny where a book about a bunch of economics and psychology papers can lead.

Continue reading here:
Richard Thaler: 'I became an academic because I'm not good at taking orders' - Times Higher Education (THE)

Never Took That Libertarian Loyalty Oath Reason.com – Reason

A recent comment suggesting it was "funny" for a "libertarian blog" to suggest the possibility of restricting private social media platforms' property rights led me to want to repost this reminder:

I'm not a libertarian.

This is not a libertarian blog.

Don't expect solid or even near-solid libertarianism from us.

Some of us are pretty hardcore libertarians. Some are more conservatives. Some are moderates. Most of us are a mix. Our blog subtitle says "Often libertarian," and that's true. But "often" was deliberately chosen to also flag "not always" (and not even almost always).

If you call me anything, you might call me a libertarianish conservative, but even that isn't really that helpful, since sometimes my positions aren't aligned either with most libertarians or most conservatives. I think human affairs are complicated thingsas my father likes to quote, "Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made." We all come at this with some general principles, but, to offer another quote, "General propositions do not decide concrete cases," in part because there are so many things we want at once and so many opportunities for good general principles to conflict.

For instance, I want liberty (often including privacy)and security; indeed, security is often another term from liberty from private misconduct (or liberty from foreign governments). These aren't always consistent, but I can't tell you that one should always trump the other. (That's why the Fourth Amendment, for instance, bansunreasonable searches and seizures rather than banning all searches and seizures; that's why the Constitution tries to create a limited government, but does create a government.) I support private property rights, subject to some limitations, and can't easily capture all the limitations into one formula. My guess is that many of my cobloggers take the same view.

Now maybe I'm not libertarian enough. Or maybe I'm too libertarian. Or maybe I'm one of these in some situations and another in others. Perfectly possible, indeed very likely. But measure me, and the blog, based on the merits of the particular analyses we offer in each post, not against our supposed (but never actually offered) assurances of libertarianism.

Read more:
Never Took That Libertarian Loyalty Oath Reason.com - Reason