Saturday, April 13, 2024

Pssst! Our Gas Prices Suck!

Those of us unfortunates who are still incarcerated in the Peoples Republic of Taxifornia are laughing out loud at the teeth-gnashing going on in our "State Media" about the increase in the "national" price of gasoline.  

They're getting worried that the "facts" about "Bidenflation" will leak out and their boy O'Biden will lose to Big Orange in November.  Because it was just reported that the price of gas is up to $3.63 a gallon today, up from $3.58 a week ago.  And $3.39 a month ago.  


If this "Letter From the Resistance" somehow manages to make its way out of this has-been, once-Golden State, possibly on the back of a carrier pigeon, and therefore influence voters' minds, please be advised the price of gas here is an arm, and quite often a leg.

Gen-Z'ers are bitching about not being able to afford a house in the Mumbler-in-Chief's economy.  Could be they soon won't be able to fuel their 20 year-old Honda Civics enough to get to their jobs at McDonalds!

Actually, not to be dramatic, but the price of a gallon of this now precious fluid down the block from me is $5.89.  And nearer to San Franpoopco I've heard it's well over $7.00.  And upwards of $8.00 and even $9.00 a gallon in the mountains. 

Does our so-called "MainStreamMedia" report that?  Do the ABC's and the NBC's and the CBS's inform their viewers that on a nightly basis?  That fully 15% of our citizenry (plus maybe100 million illegal aliens) held hostage in Taxifornia is paying TWICE AS MUCH FOR GAS as the other 49 states?  And how about the "State Media" cable channels?  Do they report the prices Taxifornians routinely pay for gas?  


Now think about this:  We are sitting on a river of oil.  The "Kern River Basin" provides enough oil and gas to fuel CA well into the future.  And when our other four gigantic oil basins are factored in,* we Americans have enough gas and oil to last at least 200 years! (courtesy U. S. Geological Survey).  In fact, we have more oil and gas reserves than every other country on Earth!  Did you know that?  

Has our "State Media" informed you of that fact?

So why are we spending Four Times as much to build windmills as it costs to recover our oil and gas?  When wind doesn't blow all the time?  And why are we investing so much in solar?  When the sun doesn't shine all the time?  And even if it did, we don't have the battery storage capacity to keep all that saved-energy for the times when it's most needed!  

And we're told these "leaders" some of us elected are choosing these options because of "Climate Change."  But the last time I checked, the sun comes up in the East and goes down in the West.  And the "Climate" blows steadily from West to East, counter-clockwise to the rotation of the Earth.  So the "Climate" our BoyGuv is using our tax money to clean, will be in Shanghai by next Tuesday.  And the Chinese would like to thank us for cleaning up their air.  And oh by the way, we just closed our last coal mine in the Northeast.  And China just opened is 1,200th Coal Mine!

Are our leaders CPDLW's,** or what?

Yes, yes they are...

*    Permian Basin (W. TX, E. NM), Eagle Ford Basin, (W. TX), Marcellus Shale (Appalachians, S. PA), Utica Shale, (S. NY, E. PA).

**   Commie, Pinko, Dummmmass, Liberal Weenies.  

Thursday, April 11, 2024

Josef Goebbels Would Be So Proud!

Imagine if Adolph Hitler had managed to get his citizens to willingly submit, actually self-select, the propaganda he was spewing their way?  The beliefs he needed them to adopt in order for him to turn Deutschland from a nascent, post-War democracy and into a fascist dictatorship?  In less than a decade?     

All I can say is, Josef Goebbels would be proud!

I think you know that I, The Chuckmeister, your Scribe Without Portfolio, am the guy who's dedicated to bringing you the unfiltered facts on any subject worth unfiltering.  And one of those facts is the news we as a society decide to consume.  And we decide, since nobody's holding a gun our heads.


Back in the 1930's, Hitler instructed his Minister of Information, one Herr Josef Goebbels, to use disinformation to convince the public that life sucked under their then Chancellor.  And that guns were bad and folks should willingly give them to the state.  And that all the ills they were suffering were the fault of the Jews.  And that they should welcome him as the Second Coming.

So what has changed, again?*

And once the public was disarmed, he threatened to shoot them if they didn't buy in to his continuing propaganda.  Like they do in Cuba.  And China.  And in North Korea.  Because their socialist/Marxist/communist governments had taken away their guns, and they could no longer fight back.  

We're not quite there yet, but if people keep self-selecting the socialist propaganda the Democrat Party keeps shoveling their way at the ballot box, we soon will. 

And I have to believe it's those self-same people who are choosing to watch our most Liberal TV channels.  Only!  The MSNBC's and the CNN's and the PBS's and the NPR's.  And of course the ABC's and the CBS's and the NBC's.  Guaranteed to give you one side of every issue, every day all day long. 

Imagine being so damn dumb as to Choose to limit themselves to only one side of every issue!  

And of course the New York Times and the Washington Post and the Chicago Tribune and the Lost Angeles Times.  All marinating their Liberal viewers and readers in a mixture of socialism, Marxism and full-on communism.  All day, and all night. 

Only the very most Liberal, and even "Progressive" side of every issue will be reported, or presented.  Remember, there are errors of "OMISSION," not reporting an "inconvenient" story, one that might help Trump, for instance, as well as "COMMISSION," by presenting factually inaccurate information (lying).

Would they do that?  Yes they would.  

On any given evening, just over 1,000,000 of your fellow citizens will choose to watch MSNBC.  During so-called "peak" hours, the 25 - 54 demographic so in vogue these days.  That's the demographic advertisers are seeking.  The ones who pay Big Bucks to advertise their dog food and their pharmaceuticals and their cars and their their shampoo. 

Ahhhh, but some 2,600,000 folks just like you are watching Fox News on an average evening (about 38% of them are Democrats, BTW!).  More than twice as many.  Seeking to be educated by Fox' professional journalists.  And their contributors.  Where you can expect every subject with more than one side will always be represented by an expert, on each side.  And although Fox is branded as leaning Right, there will always be someone representing the Left in any debate.  Like one would expect real journalism to include. 

And then you, Mr. and Mrs. and Mzzz. America, can decide for yourself what to think and what to believe.  What a concept! 

(Can't do that on MSPMS.  They shut off his feed when Big Orange begins to offer a differing perspective.  Or even his nomination acceptance speech.  Oh, the humanity!)

And lastly, CNN brought in a miniscule 605,000 viewers.  Half as many as their ideological sister channel, MSNBC.  And less than the Home and Garden Channel, BTW.  Or the History channel.  Or A&E.  Or the Outdoor Channel.  This must weigh heavily on the tiny minds of its "leaders!"  The ones who come and go, making stupid decisions which blow up in their micro-abrased and Botox-relaxed faces.  

I can't get the image of 1,000,000 sad folks plunked down in front of their TV's, slavishly consuming the one-sided blather dished their way from the likes of MSNBC and CNN and PBS 24 hours-per-day.  At least the Microsoft folks, the "MS" in MSNBC, learned early on that the NBC folks were waaay out in left field and ran like bandits to distance themselves.  Leaving any effort toward moderation left aside by this admittedly Liberal channel. 

I think I can sum it up this way:  Listeners to NPR wouldn't know Hunter Biden had a laptop.  Viewers of MSNBC were told the laptop was "Russian disinformation."  CNN's viewers were told there was a laptop, but Hunter's now clean and sober, so it no longer matters.  All while an alarming percentage of our electorate chooses to consume this socialist tripe.  They vote, and they breed.  Josef Goebbels would be so proud...

*   Lemme' see here:  Everything the National Socialists (NAZIS) were for...the Democrat Party is for!  Hmmmm...

Tuesday, April 9, 2024

Face it, Cars Are Ugly!

Are you old enough to remember when cars were beautiful?  No?

When they were works of art?  Remodeled from stem to stern every single year?  As in, unrecognizable one year to the next?  Can you remember that?

If not, you're the poorer for it.  There was a time, several decades ago, when automobiles were designed to be lovely to look at, as well as to drive.  And early every September they unmasked a new edition.  And each year was advertised as being lower, and wider, and longer, and more powerful.  And quicker and slicker and neater and cuter!  

I can recall peeking through a tear in the butcher paper covering the floor-to-ceiling windows at my local Chevy dealer's for an early view of the new 1957's.  Because how cars looked back then made a big difference as to how they sold.  We were just coming off a Big War and hungry for newer and bigger and better.  And the car makers were providing it.

I ask you to think back to the 1957 Chrysler 300C, if you can.  And the '60 300F and '61 300G.   Created by the famed designer Virgil Exner.  All stunning!  Think the '57 Plymouth Sport Fury (Christine!).  And the 1960 DeSoto Adventurer.  A rolling work of art.  And the '64 Imperial Le Baron.  Plus the '67 Dodge Charger.  Unique!    

And how about the "Tri-Fives," the '55, '56, and '57 Chevy Bel Airs so coveted today?  And the freakily gorgeous '59 Impala?  I'd love to own one now.  And there are the cars designed by the famous Harley Earle back in the '60's.  How about the famous '61 Impala "bubbletop?"  Just beautiful!  Or GM's '64 Oldsmobile Starfire?  And the 1960 and '61 Pontiac Venturas and Bonnevilles?  Stopped traffic.  And the gorgeous '72 Buick (boattail) Riviera?  How did this make it past accounting?  And the '68 and especially '69 Chevelles, perhaps the most iconic auto design ever (think Bumblebee)?  

And Ford's beautiful '60 and '61 Starliners?  And the Ford (Shelby) Cobras?  And the '55 - '57 Thunderbird?  And it's '55/'56 Lincoln Continental?  And the iconic '70 - '71 429 cu. in. Mustangs?  And the weird but wonderful '58 Mercury Park Lane?  (I'm not a Ford fan so I've already stretched to say something complementary).*

These are but a very few of the gorgeous cars I grew up coveting.  I wanted them all!  And wound up owning 127 of them, BTW.  In both the U.S. and Europe.  Turns out shooting pool for big money in dirty dark dens of iniquity paid well enough to finance my love of cars.  And women, too, but that's another story.

When my love of cars began a 2-door hardtop was cool.  A convertible was even cooler.  A station wagon could possibly be cool, depending upon who was driving it.  A pickup was not cool, 'cause they were for work.  And a four-door sedan was the absolute un-coolest thing you could possibly drive.  And you hid your face when you did.  

Which is what we've got now. 

And to convince you that style was important, Ford's "Edsel" ('58 - '60) proves it.  The Edsel was ugly.  And it failed.  Ford released it in '58 and it went down in flames.  It was laughed off the market and cost Ford more than $One Billion Dollars.  Back when a $Billion was real money.

And then Detroit looked to Europe and discovered that they didn't actually need to change the way cars looked every single year.  So they started stretching out redesigns to 4 - 5 years, and even as much as a decade to save money.  Even more in some cases.  Chrysler's "300" series was unveiled in 2004.  They just killed in 2023.  

(Some say Chrysler was so tardy because they didn't have any money for such niceties as "looks.")

Go outside.  Take a look around.  With the exception of Porsches and Corvettes, I'll bet you dollars to donuts you cannot tell one make from another from 50 feet away.  Especially from a side view.  Most of them are now "SUV's," which stands for "Sport Utility Vehicle," BTW.  That means they're pickup trucks with a different suit of clothes.  They poll-tested various combinations of words until they found something that made trucks sound good.  

You take a $25,000 Chevy pickup, you see, you remove the bed, and then you add a "station wagon," six- or nine-seat body.  And then you market it as something else entirely.  

Example:  The Cadillac Escalade is the $60,000 Chevrolet Suburban with a bit nicer leather seating and carpeting.  For an extra $40,000.  But people buy them.  Proving the truth in P. T. Barnum's admonition, "A sucker is born every minute."  

I would offer that cars ceased being beautiful and started being ugly just about 1980.  They were "three-box" square, and ugly as sin.  That's when the Gubmint stuck its gigantic maw into the car bizz and started mandating all sorts of safety measures.  5 mph bumpers and 18 air bags and crush-resistant bodies.  And in doing so all the designers were sent packing.  While our cars went from an average weight of 2,800 pounds in the '60's to 4,200 pounds today.  And as much as 6,000 pounds for (ugly) SUV's!  And another 2,000 pounds if one chooses a battery-electric!  

We Americans have been conditioned to believe that cars don't have to look good.  They just have to cart the family to and from grandma's, and the soccer team to and from the games.  All while their price went from a few $Thousand to $One Hundred Thousand!  We used to park under a shade tree, pile under the hood and install a bigger carburetor.  Now, there's a big metal shield under the hood preventing you from even seeing the engine upon which you're making Big Payments.  

And you only have to wash it along with the change in seasons.  Because there's no more pride of ownership!


I have owned a glorious '60 Chrysler Saratoga hardtop.  And a '60 Chevy Impala convertible.  And a bubble-top '61 Impala.  And a '62 409-409 while the song was on the charts ($3,802.76).  And a '66 427 Corvette, with all four off-road options ($6,674.20), worth $500k today.  And a '66 Porsche 911.  And a '53 Rolls-Royce.  And a '64 Porsche 356 (bathtub).  And a '61 Pontiac Ventura, 348 hp, 4-sp.  And a Mercedes-Benz 300d Cabriolet (gangster wagon).  And a '57 Bel-Air Sedan Delivery (one of 55).  And more than 100 other cars.  


I've lost sleep over not being able to keep a few of these treasures.  After all, it would take a warehouse to keep them, and a full-time mechanic to look after them.  None of which I happen to have.  So like everyone else, I bought them, and used them up, and traded them in for the next ride.  They were disposable as well as beautiful.  Like toasters back then.  Cars were traded in every 2 and 1/2 years back then.  Unlike now, which is 10 or more.  Seldom did they make it to 80,000 miles.  Their build quality was uniformly terrible so we traded them often.  Or just left them by the side of the road.  Buy 'em, trash 'em, send 'em right to the junk yard.  

Dayyummm, would I like to have a few of them back!

But those days are gone.  I'll exult in the memories of laying down 200 yards of rubber in front of City Hall back in my rebellious days (they never left).  While driving with a light right foot now to try and defend against $6.00 gas.

BTW, I'd advise anyone too young to recall the joy of living in this by-gone era, please Google these cars and others of their time, and bask in their beauty.  Then go to your local bar and try and drown your sorrow for having been born too late...

*   I'll add to this list the mid-'60's Ferrari 330 GTC's and 250 GTO's and 365 GTC Daytonas, and the '61 - '74 Jaguar E-Type, and the '68 - '70 Lamborghini Miura P400's, and the 1955 - '58 M-B 300 SL's.  But they were from Europe, cost a $Bundle even then, were almost unobtainable, and were - and are - moving works of art.  Plus, they're now worth $Millions. 

Sunday, April 7, 2024

Tax The Rich!!!

There's are certain things that we poor citizens hear on a continuing basis from our Democrat politicians.  They are, "Ban assault weapons!"  And "Abortion until the very second of birth!"  And, "Buy electric cars!"  And, "The economy is wonderful!"  And "Transgenders built our Country!"  And, "Gas is cheap!"  And also, 

                   tax the rich."

Those interminable bleatings would cause one to believe that our "rich" are undertaxed.  As in, they're keeping too much of our money.  Do you believe that?  If so, I'm guessing you sit on your hands and knees in front of your Telly and watch MSNBC all day and all night.  Or perhaps CNN.  And PBS and NPR and the "Alphabets."  Those channels make it a point to avoid telling you some inconvenient facts (OMISSION), while continually misleading you about others (COMISSION).

Let's talk a bit about those evil "rich" people we're supposedly under-taxing.  First, the Top 1% of our wage-earners here in 'Murica pay 29% of all taxes collected.  Did you know that?   

The Top 2%?  Sure.  It's 37%.  The Top 5% pays 41%.  And the Top 10%?  Yep, Fellow Patriots, the Top 10% pays fully 45% of all our taxes.  One in ten...pays half our taxes.  And Joe O'Biden, our Mumbler-in-Chief, believes they don't pay enough.  

So the next time you see your lawyer or doctor or banker drive by in his shiny new $100,000 Regina Juggernaut, just remember he's paying your freight.  

And get this:  49.5% of all Americans avoid paying income all!  "Free riders," they're called.  While we've been driving the bus, they've been riding in it...for free!  And they get to vote just like we taxpayers do!  Like childless couples trying to tell us parents how to raise our kids!

Wait a minute.  Do I hear somebody out there in InternetLand who disbelieves my pronunciamentos?  Really?  Don't you know that I scrupulously research every statistic I offer you, my Fellow Patriots?  And in more than 15 years writing this unassuming little blog, I've never been found wanting.  Just thought I'd pass that along.

So in furtherance of the unfairness of our current "Progressive" tax system,* let's assume for a moment you've just designed the newest and best video game, ever.  So you get hired by a game company at $1,500,000 a year.  One Point Five Million!  A bundle of dough, yes?  You're now rich, yes?  And even though you've voted Democrat all your young life, and believe that every Republican is evil, you'll now get to breathe rarified air.  Like those filthy Republicans.  

Oh but wait!  You live in Taxifornia and you're about to learn why it's earned that name.  From your $1,500,000, here are your current deductions:

       -  $513,164 - Federal Income Taxes

       -  $184,557 - CA State Income Taxes

       -      $9,114 - Social Security 

       -    $33,450 - Medicare

       -      $1,604 - State Disability 

          $741,886 - Total CA Taxes

So you make a $Million Five and you get to keep less than half that.  Because you live in the State with the very highest taxes, and in a Country run by incompetent politicians.  Still think the "rich" don't pay their "fair share?"  

And on the way out the Digital Door, the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) has apparently won the war it's waged against McDonalds and all the other big franchisors.  It spent more than $60 Million of its Members' union dues over the past 12 years to try and break the franchisor/franchisee model.  When it couldn't, it learned all it had to do was give our BoyGuv Newsom a suitcase full of campaign cash.    

Now, beginning workers at chain stores are earning $41,600 a year!  $20 an hour!  Ain't that grand!  Now those same employees, who qualified for all sorts of Federal, state and local aid before their 25% windfall, will now be forced to pay union dues!  And oh yeah, State and Federal income taxes!  And the rent and free food and childcare assistance previously enjoyed.  Which will leave them looking at their pay stubs the same way our video gamer looks at his; they'll get screwed just like he did.

A stark realization will come when these tens of thousands of newly-"rich" employees learn they'll be keeping less.  All while their employers are laying off staff, shortening operating hours, investing in automation, losing customers due to necessary price increases, or just giving up and going home...

*   Our Federal tax codes are anything but "Progressive."  They are regressive in every sense.  Think about it:  We are systematically punishing success by fining those who attain it!  And the better they do the deeper we reach in their pockets.  We should leave their money with these winners so they'll hire more employees and generate more taxes.  Get it?

BTW, thanks a lot for reading the drivel I put forth.  I know it's a one-way conversation, but you can and should talk back.  Let me know your opinions about my opinions.  Good or bad.  I assure you, I'm grizzled enough to take it...

Friday, April 5, 2024

So Who Do These People Work For?

I have a question:  Just who, I would ask, do waiters and waitresses work for?

The tipping culture here in America has become such a problem, for everyone, that I am finally forced to ask this eternal - and infernal - question:

            Who do they work for?

Who do the baristas at Starbucks work for?  Do they work for that coffee company, or do they work for me, the person they are there to serve?  Or the young lady or man (or other) who brings me a plate of food at Macaroni Grill?  Or the folks who bring my groceries from Wal-Mart?  

Who do they work for?  Do they work for Starbucks and Macaroni Grill and Wal-Mart?  If so, why am I expected to increase/augment their income by providing "tips" to their employees for doing what I'm already paying for?  In any way, shape or form? 

The concept of "tipping," just so you know, grew out of 18th Century England.  The idea of throwing the waiter an extra tuppence "To Insure Promptness" might actually get them their mead a bit quicker.  

The custom then followed English immigrants across "the pond" and has now infested America.  Where it seems we poor consumers are expected/required/demanded/extorted to provide a tip upon every transaction. 

So here's the question:  Unless our servants do something extra, something above and beyond what they're already being paid to do, by their employers, why should I, or anyone for that matter, be expected to pay them extra?  

Why don't the restaurants and coffee shops and the Wal-Marts pay them such that they no longer hold me hostage for an extra "tip?"  And if not, why do their employees continue to work at these establishments?  

Why has their interminable angst been transferred by some sleight-of-hand to us, the consumers? 

And will it ever be that I'm no longer forced to stare down some pimply-faced miscreant in an apron over whether a 20% tip is "enough," or if it should be more like "50%?  

This, as they say, has gotten out of hand!

What makes this my subject for today is me, The Chuckmeister, your Loyal Scribe Without Portfolio, finding out just who provides all those little tablet computers you see in the restaurants and barber shops and coffee emporiums.  The ones that ask, "How much of a tip would you like to leave?"  A "sharp-ended close," in a salesman's parlance.  Making you feel guilty if you don't roll over and submit.  Transferring the awkward stare from the waitpersons to a stupid machine.  

Is this what we've become?

Turns out that company, "Toast," provides these little $3,500 computers for "FREE!"  Except, they get 3% of all the monetary transactions.  All of them.  From every restaurant and bar and grill and coffee shop.  All over the Nation.  All over the WORLD!  And the bigger the tip you give your server/helper/ bringer/mixer, the more of the total they take!  They make $3 out of a $100 bill!  It's to their advantage for you to tip exorbitantly.  I've even seen these things in self-checkout lines!    

It's enough to make you want to just stay home, roll down the shades, double-lock the doors and wait until all this foolishness is dead and gone.  Declared over.  Please God! 

Are you getting this?  

The Simple Solution:  a.) Pay the servers and the baristas and the delivery persons from the Starbucks and Wal-Marts enough to live.  Enough to want to work for these places without having to rely on me and mine for supplementary income.  They're not my children, nor do I need to support them.  

Or b.), provide an alternative in each of these locations for me and others to seat ourselves, get our own water, place our own orders, and wait our own tables.  And maybe brew and pour our own coffee.  Of course, that would wring out all the rationale for going out to eat.       

Or maybe we could all just stay home.   

And then leave it up to us as to whether we can afford to buy that product or that service once its "true cost," minus the tips, is factored in and fully calculated.  

If it makes that plate of spaghetti unaffordable, so be it.  That's what's called a "Free Market Economy."  The Dollars flow to the worthy.  

Tough Love.  The Only Way...  

Wednesday, April 3, 2024

7 Built, Only 499,993 to Go...

You will all recall, no doubt, that the O'Biden Administration "invested" $7,500,000,000 (with a "B") of your taxpayer money to build 500,000 "PIE" (Plug-In-Electric) car chargers.  Across our fruited plain.  Two and one-half years ago.  

To date, seven have been built.


Only 499,993 to go.

Why have they so indelibly failed at this simple task?  After all, Elon Musk, without the ability to print money, as O'Biden does daily, put 21,852 Supercharger ports on line, as of last January.  Per the U. S. Dept. of Energy.

The money for this boondoggle came from the $1 TRILLION DOLLAR Infrastructure Bill passed by Congress and signed by the Mumbler-in-Chief back in November, 2021.    

The idea behind this electrifying plan was to first force people to buy cars they do not want, which use a propulsion system they do not want.  And then make them pay sometimes twice as much as they pay for "ICE" (Internal Combustion Engine) automobiles.  With 220,000 million of them already in our fleet.  And 120 year history behind them.  

But Nooooooooo!  These Limousine Liberals cooked up some plan to "Save the Planet" from "Global Warming," or some such, and never, ever think past that "Let's just tax the rich some more!"  Or, "Let's just turn the entire auto industry on its ear!  It's only giant chunk of our entire economy!  What could possibly go wrong?"  

I'll just pass along a bit of advice to these wannabe commies.  If you really want to get folks to buy in to this nonsense, you have to first remove "range anxiety" from the equation.  We have 299,854 gas stations in America.  We have fewer than 38,000 charging stations.  And that includes Tesla's.  So building 500k of them is necessary.  

We've built SEVEN!

It's like, they make you pony up a $Trillion Dollars and then don't even bother to follow through and spend it.  They're not only charlatans and pocket-pickers, they're incompetent fools!

It might just be possible for Big Gubmint to act more like a collection of idiotic fools.  I don't know how it could, but since it always have, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt.  So far, every single thing O'Biden has done since entering office, everything he's touched...has been wrong.  And I'd bet everything he'll do between now and November 5th, will be wrong.  

We'll let Barry Obama, in his own words, sum it up for you:

"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to fu*k things up."  

                                         -  B. Hussein Obama, August 16, 2020.

Can't really improve on that, Barry. Be sure to charge up your Fisker before you leave home...  


Monday, April 1, 2024

Let's Devolve a Notch or Two.

Can you think of a reason, any reason, any reason at all, why a man ought to have to buy a license to go fishing?

I mean, really?  The lake or river or ocean is there and I'm not going to hurt it.  And if I don't catch that fish some bigger fish will eat it.  So what does a license to go fishing do for the man who has to buy it?  Does it make the fish easier to catch?  After all, it's called "fishing," not "catching."

Or does it make all the fish line up and bite on the now-licensed fisherman's hook?  Does it give the license holder inside information as to where the good fishing spots are?  Or statistics as to where one has a better chance of landing dinner?  Especially if you need to fish to have some dinner to eat?

The answer to all the foregoing questions is, NO!  

All it does it generate revenue for the state.  So they can hire guys in green uniforms to hassle you.  Too big of a hook, or not the right kind of pole, or fishing before or after the state thinks is appropriate.  In other words, bureaucracy for its own sake.  Generating no reason at all to exist, except to hire lots and lots  of folks doing lots and lots of things, to propagate its continued existence.

Oh wait!  I hear somebody kvetching that these game wardens do good by stocking streams with fish!  Okay, I'll bite.  But then they hide in the bushes and try to bust people who catch too many of them.  Or maybe the wrong ones.  Or the wrong sizes.    

Bait and switch?  Hmmm?

And one could reasonably extend this same sort of thinking to hunting.  A sport, along with fishing, which is deeply ingrained in our DNA.  We've been hunting and fishing to stay alive since time immemorial.  Hundreds of thousands of years.  At least.  We need it.  It's in our soul.  We don't want to pay to do something God gave us the natural right to do.  Nor, many would say, should we have to.  

And if your family's hungry and you take a deer without all the expensive licenses and permits and permission slips, you get a fat $Fine.  And then they take your deer and give it to the hungry family down the road.  Plus, you six months in the county lockup to contemplate the errors of your ways.

Think about it:  We're naturally a bunch of hunter-gatherers.  So hunting and gathering should be enshrined in the Bill of Rights, me thinks.  Proposed new 1st Amendment:  "You have the Right to say whatever you want, whenever you want, yada yada, and take a deer for your family any time you want."  

Didn't work out that way.  About 45,000 years ago, give or take, our forebears decided to pitch their tents next to each other and share the campfire.  And enjoy newfound safety in numbers from that pesky saber tooth tiger out there.

And then more people brought their talents to the group, so some could hunt while others made dinner.  And pretty soon you had a town.  With a mayor and a city council.  And their job was to make you pay to do the things you used to do for free.  And hire a police force to hunt you down if you don't.

Makes one think it might be nice to devolve a notch or two, embrace some of the freedoms we used to enjoy, and go hunting and fishing...