The Voice of Reason

Don't occupy Wall Street, take back Capitol Hill

2011-10-19T08:40:00.001-07:00

October 15, 2011
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Protests against corporate greed spread across the globe," (L.A. Times, World, October 15, 2011)

If protestors against Wall Street are upset about “big banks” using their influence to buy special favors, then just who do they think is selling those favors?

Career-oriented politicians in Congress will always need money, and there is no better way for an ambitious politician to get money then to bend to those who possess it.

No, occupying Wall Street is clearly not the solution, but taking back Capitol Hill is. Ending long-term tenure in Congress by instituting term limits for our elected officials is a critical first step down the right road.

Healthcare is not a right

2009-10-04T10:41:00.001-07:00

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America

September 5, 2009
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Patient approach to healthcare reform," (LA Times, Opinion, September 2, 2009)

Congress should not be debating the cost of healthcare reform because healthcare is not even a right. The United States was founded on the principle that all individuals are born with the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That does not mean we have a right to welfare. It does, however, mean that individuals possess the inherent freedom to act without coercion.

The government's push to impose “affordable healthcare for all” infringes on the rights of Americans who are unwilling to subsidize it. Compulsory welfare at the expense of individual rights is a cost no American should have to bear.

Capitalism isn't the problem, it's the solution

2008-10-15T19:32:00.001-07:00

Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics

Octobert 15, 2008
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Ideology takes a back seat in bank strategy," (L.A. Times, News, October 15, 2008)

The L.A. Times alludes to the government's bailout of the financial system and questions whether we are "witnessing the erosion of capitalism."

Capitalism is an economic system based on unregulated free markets, private ownership and open competition. These characteristics, however, have been absent from the U.S. economy for well over a century. Mortgage monopolies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were created and backed by the government in order to bolster homeownership, thus spawning America's insatiable demand for housing. Congress enacted laws such as the Community Reinvestment Act, punishing lenders who refused to make loans to high-risk borrowers. And the Federal Reserve manipulated interest rates to artificial lows that served as the catalyst to an unsustainable housing bubble.

What we are witnessing today is the inevitable result of an intrusive government. We don't need a bailout, we need a separation of state and economics. We need laissez-faire capitalism.

Disaster Populism

2008-01-30T16:08:00.001-08:00

Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

January 31, 2008
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Why the right loves a disaster," (L.A. Times, Opinion, Jan. 27)

Naomi Klein urges progressives to reinstate the populist movement to combat right-wing ideologues, who she believes have exploited desperate countries into accepting capitalism as the solution to their social ills -- a theory she refers to as "disaster capitalism." But just because countries deregulate their economies does not mean they have been exploited. It does not take years of research to realize why Russia and other countries chose to deregulate: without deregulation, they had less freedom to innovate, they were less productive and as a result their economies failed.

Perhaps if left-wing ideologues such as Klein realized that the "economic meltdowns" were caused by statist policies, then they would not have to preoccupy themselves with reviving "disaster populism."

Don't just blame lenders for subprime mess

2007-08-15T12:53:00.001-07:00

The Coming Crash in the Housing Market

August 15, 2007
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Street of broken dreams," (Orange County Register, Market Place, August 13)

Reporters John Gittelsohn and Ronald Campbell brazenly charge that "subprime lenders intentionally made loans customers couldn't afford" because "none of the loan professionals had a long-term stake in the borrowers' ability to repay their mortgages." Then how do they reconcile this supposed quick-buck scheme with the fact that many lenders not only lost millions of dollars on defaulted mortgages, but were forced to file for bankruptcy or sell their companies at a loss?

And what about the borrowers who defaulted on their loans because they did not understand the "complex" terms of their loan? Let's be frank: To voluntarily sign your name on numerous pages of legally binding loan documents, without understanding what you are signing – or not knowing whether you will be able to repay your loan – is not only irresponsible, it's stupid.

Subprime lenders provide a great service: for a higher return on their loans they are willing to take on the risk of lending money to borrowers who have poor credit – and who otherwise would not be able to obtain a loan. Unfortunately, people usually have poor credit for a reason: They are financially irresponsible – and in a market where interest rates are going up, and real estate values are dropping, that is a recipe for financial disaster.

The problem with immigration is not the immigrants

2007-05-30T00:24:00.001-07:00

May 30, 2007
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "The Next Americans," (L.A. Times, Opinion, May 27)

Professor Tomas Jiménez believes that Americans should help immigrants assimilate into our culture by providing them with education, healthcare and jobs.

For centuries, immigrants have identified the U.S. as a land of opportunity because it is free. But being free does not mean free entitlements from the government. Freedom means having the right to pursue one's own happiness and rise as far as one's abilities allow.

Clearly the "threat" to America does not come from immigrants; it comes from progressives, like Jiménez, who seek to transform the United States from a land of opportunity to a land of entitlement.

Free will is human nature

2007-03-14T21:25:00.000-07:00

Human Action: A Treatise on Economics

March 4, 2007
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Getting real with human nature," (Orange County Register, Commentary, March 4)

Columnist David Brooks argues that humans, by nature, are genetically predisposed to act violently; thus, he concludes that humans need a "strong order - imposing state" to curb our violent instinctual behavior.

But if humans are inclined to act as Brooks describes, then what would stop the leaders of these strong, imposing governments from acting violently toward other countries -- or even their own citizens? Fortunately, there will be no need to create another police state because human nature is not as dark, and hopeless, as Brooks believes. Humans, unlike all other animals, possess a volitional consciousness, which gives us the unique capacity to think or not.

The greatest contributions and advancements were made by those who chose to use their rational mind to produce something of value. David Brooks would serve himself (and others) well if he would follow suit and do the same.

Does God exist?

2006-11-19T18:30:00.000-08:00

Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology: Expanded Second Edition

Sunday, November 19, 2006
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Atheism's intellectual certainty is absurd," (Orange County Register, Commentary, Nov. 19)

For those of us who "seek truth" and want to know if it is possible for God to exist, it is imperative that we ask ourselves: How do we know something exists? The answer: To exist is to be something (to be real), as distinguished from nothing – which does not exist (unreal). We know something really exists because we can perceive it – i.e., we can define it by identifying its essential characteristics. For instance, ask a million different people to identify and define the concept "table."

Now instruct them to do the same thing with God. While it's easy for everyone to identify and define the essential features that make up the concept of a table (e.g., a flat, horizontal surface, supported by legs), it's impossible for them to do the same when it comes to God. Why?–because God does not exist.

All the terrorists are Muslims

2006-08-22T19:02:00.000-07:00

Tuesday, August 22, 2006
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Fight impulse to profile Muslims," (Orange County Register, Commentary, Aug. 20)

Columnist Ruben Navarrette Jr. claims that it is wrong to single out "Muslim-Americans" for security profiling. Instead he believes that, to be "fair," all Americans should be subjected to profiling -- even "85-year-old grandmas" who aren't Muslims.

This makes no sense. It is a waste of time and resources to profile anyone but Muslims. The one common and recurring trait among all terrorists who have hijacked commercial airplanes, singled out and killed Western civilians and bombed Western embassies, is that they are Muslim.

To say that all Muslims are terrorists is wrong. But to realize that all terrorists are Muslim is a fact of reality -- something proponents of political correctness, like Navarrette, seem to be in denial of.

Altruism brings disaster

2006-01-08T18:03:00.002-08:00

The Virtue of Selfishness

Sunday, January 8, 2006
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Researcher finds anyone can be altruist," (Orange County Register, Local, Jan. 2)

Professor Kristen Monroe claims that everyone has the potential to be an altruist. But why would anyone want to be an altruist?

Altruism is an ethical code that advocates living unselfishly for the sake of others; thus, in order to live morally -- according to altruism -- one must be willing to sacrifice their life for the lives of others. Throughout history we have seen -- and continue to see -- the disastrous consequences of this philosophical ideal when taken to its full political embodiment: socialism, communism, theocracy, etc., all are failed (and corrupt) political ideologies based upon the ethics of altruism.

So, while everyone has the potential to be an altruist, maybe it's time we all try being egoists for a change.

Morality matters (Hiroshima, 60 years later)

2005-08-07T15:21:00.000-07:00

Sunday, August 7, 2005
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Nuclear weapons in the 21st century," (The Orange County Register, Letters, Commentary, Aug. 7)

Any country, religious faction, or group that initiates force against a free country is immoral and forfeits it's right to exist. A country that respects individual rights and bans the use of force has a moral right and a moral responsibility to its citizens to retaliate against any attack with all the force it deems necessary in order to defeat its enemy.

The fault for any blood shed shall be on the hands of those responsible for initiating the use of force.

Good Government?

2005-04-18T23:06:00.000-07:00

1984 (Signet Classics)

Monday, February 14, 2005
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Professor Machan's myopia," (The Orange County Register, Reader Rebuttals, Commentary, Feb. 6)

Attorney Richard Hutchinson contends that "no idea is supremely or unalloyedly good" -- not even free speech or individual liberty; thus, we must be willing to compromise our beliefs and tolerate government intervention into our daily lives before we reach some absurd "logical conclusion" on our own.

Unfortunately, Hutchinson's arguement doesn't reach a logical conclusion. If no one can be certain and no ideas are "supremely good," then how can Hutchinson be so certain that compromise and government regulation of our daily lives is a good idea?

Capitalism: The Right Kind of Third World Aid

2005-04-18T22:50:00.000-07:00

The Wealth of Nations (Bantam Classics)

Saturday, February 5, 2005
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "What Poor Countries Need Is Less--but Smarter--Aid," (L.A. Times, Commentary, Jan. 30)

To reduce poverty in developing nations, Thomas Dichter says, "we should base our efforts on what the Third World tells us it wants." But we already know what Third World countries want; they want to end poverty and prosper economically.

In order to combat poverty in underdeveloped countries, it is essential to properly identify the fundamental ideas that need to be adopted so that they can prosper.

This can be achieved by asking: What was the main social ideology that led to the industrial revolution and consequently the wealth of the developed nations? The answer: the only moral system based on free trade and respect for the rights of the individual -- capitalism.

The U.S. is a republic, not a democracy

2005-04-18T22:36:00.001-07:00

The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America

Friday, October 1, 2004
By: Brady Cuthbert

To the Editor:

Re: "Monitoring America," (The Orange County Register, News, Sept. 26)

Global Exchange claims the Electoral College is "wanting" because it prevents presidential candidates from being elected by popular vote in a democracy. But America is not a democracy - it's a constitutional republic.

This is why the word "democracy" does not appear in the U.S. Constitution or The Bill of Rights. The United States government was founded on the basis of preserving the inalienable rights of the individual. Thus, it was necessary to establish a representative government with checks and balances on power.

The Electoral College is a representative body that accomplishes this by checking the arbitrary will of the majority from voting away individual rights; and by balancing power among all states by preventing candidates with only regional appeal from winning elections. The Electoral College is a necessity for preserving rights and balancing power; if there is anything wanting about the Electoral College, its Global Exchange's understanding of it.

The Voice of Reason

2005-04-05T23:27:00.000-07:00

My mind is my temple; and reason is my religion.
Brady Cuthbert