Much needed rest...Thanks Coach for a great program!

"Useing"?

Must stretch... can't move from my warm-up, WOD, and tabata...

woohoo,LOOOOVVVVEEEE it!

KK

Great video! Great CrossFit in Santa Monica, CA. I had the pleasure of working out with them while on a business trip to California. They produce great workouts, so I would recommend stopping by if your in the area.

I spy some vibram fivefinger classics in that picture.....just makes me want them even MORE!

Thank God it's a rest day. I need it! But I love the work! Thanks Coach!

So THAT'S where Cil's been hanging out, good to see her again. And Dave Leys coming back like a blast from the past. The KB workouts are the gear, I'm gonna have to give that one a whirl. Hurts so good.

I definately think that dude's gloves where inhibiting his ability to do TGU's. Just an opinion, lose the gloves.

2 Days until I'm AllieCali for a whole week. I'm going to start counting down the hours.

I've set the date for the East Coast CF games - May 31st. I will have all the details coming shortly.

E-mail me if you have any questions.

What were the weights for the lunges in the WOD video? Also, 12x TGU Windmill is 12x(1 TGU, 1 Windmill) right?

When Jonesy and Dave Leys are working out together all bets are off - those guys are monsters! Great job guys!

#10 Y. Zhou - They were using one set of d-bells for the workout. So if they used a 50# d-bell for the get-up-mill they used 100# (two 50# d-bells) for the walking lunges.

great article. Sadly, our country is headed in the opposite direction.

Pat,
Ok i am committed. Gonna start with yesterdays, tomorrow(20 min HSPU L-pullup, lunge). Try to keep up!!

Dutch

The article quoted Milton Friedman saying that "...economic freedom is also an indispensable means toward the achievement of political freedom." This is a total aside question of mine, but on a small scale level is this always the case? For instance, "finanical independence is an indispensable means toward the achievement of independence" in the case of a young person leaving their parents in American, and I would suspect, most Western cultures today. Would this be applicable to many other groups today and throughout history?

Is that a Dave Leys sighting?

As an edit to my post #9. Just making it clear that this is the "East Coast CF challenge", not affiliated or linked to the CF games out West. Just a way to have some friendly competition amongst the East Coast CF that may or may not be able to attend the CF games in July.

Dave, Cill, Andy, and Jamie. Nice to see all of you. Trying to make this southern boy go cali huh? Nice WOD. Looking to try that one soon.

No rest for the weary, tomorrow is bi's and tri's,abs, and a 2 mile run. Loving site,, new to it all but a swimmer for 12 years, stopped everything in college, started lifting for the first time a year ago went from 6'3 and 165 to 185 of solid lean muscle with normal lifting routine(goal is to be 215 and 6-8% body fat), thanks to this expert advice i am fast returning to the lung capacity of old and awosome overall strength. posted my first WOD results yesterday, and will be posting many, many more

Leah-

I don't find Freidman's statement particularly compelling, because he describes economic freedoms as an "indispensible" means.

The use of "indispensible" creates all sorts of problems. By making economic freedoms and "indispensible" means, it suggests that there always must be economic freedom in order for there to be political freedom. However, there are plenty of states that have economic freedom but little political freedom, and have done so over a long period of time (the Middle Eastern oil states come to mind), There are also states with political freedom but little economic freedom (many of the Second- and Third-wave democracies struggle with this).

There is also a directional issue. Does economic freedom lead to political freedom? Or vice versa? There are plenty of political scientists who fall in both camps.

I think you could make an argument that economic freedom is, in some cases, the driving force behind political liberalization, but it's inaccurate to call it an "indispensible means"

Tony, didn't you do that workout as well? Why aren't you in there? It was great seeing you and Jamie (however so brief)when you were in LA. Awesome video and great job Michael, Jonesy, Dave, Alex, Valla and everyone else who did that beast of a workout!

Skimmed article (yes, I'm being intellectually lazy again). The author seems to be a master of the obvious (MOTO). Could anyone dispute that a "chicken in every pot" promotes a more cooperative society? But I'm sure to be shouted down by the discontented Trotskyists.

Like supertermites, they riddle the oaks that represent the simple truths espoused by MOTO, not knowing what the hell to do with all the sawdust they've created.

And another thing: who will pay for all the chickens and pots?

Ian -- sorry, but with all due respect, you've got basic facts entirely wrong.

Which ME states do you think have a history of economic freedom? Truth is --- not a one.

And, please, 2nd and 3rd world states with political freedom but not economic freedom? That is even more absurd. Support your claim -- I know it's false. Prove me wrong.

See this image, a map showing comparative economic freedom around the world: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/GM_-_Countries_by_Economic_Freedom_Index.png/800px-GM_-_Countries_by_Economic_Freedom_Index.png

It doesn't even involve reading an essay. But the corresponding Wikipedia article is certainly a good overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

Here's a pointed op-ed, directly addressing the question of economic freedom (lack thereof) in the middle east, its consequences in political tyranny, and the role of these factors in promoting terrorism: http://www.mskousen.com/Books/Articles/0206map.html

For sources of argument, I suggest: 1) human nature. Can you demonstrate that it is consistent with human nature, that when you limit his options, he respects other people's needs more (pol freedom), AND comes up with better solutions to life's problems? (econ prosperity)

2) Historical record. Please show cases in history where political freedom arose from a high degree of relative economic regulation.

3) Economics. Look at rates of entrepreneurship, quality of life, and correlation with indicators of political freedom -- including tolerance, free speech, civil rights. Please, find a case of negative correlation, because that is what you're saying exists.

4) Psychology -- back to human nature. Find cases where people who are slaves or heavily controlled in their means of production (securing a living) do not behave as inferior, subordinate, or 2nd-class citizens -- what is their corresponding appreciation of civil rights, of political freedom?

I don't care for the distinction between economic and political freedom, but it was an outcome of 20th century authoritarianism, called "liberalism" -- they inherited freedom, but the political machine empowered them to try grabbing more and more wealth and assert more economic control over others. They touted political freedom; they didn't understand its source; and they create this idea that people can be "free" without the basic freedom to trade, to create services and products and engage freely in contracts with equally free clients and suppliers.

I love that CF makes trainers into entrepreneurs.

And a free market is an expression, a necessary corollary, of free minds. You can't have one without the other.

Good article, except graph one doesn't look like a clear relationship

I don't see how this article is going to spark heated debate.

The article presents an extreme point of view no longer as popular as it once was. And with good reason.

I happen to be a firm believer in capitalism. But much of the world isn't quite as enthusiastic. The central idea in the article – that more capitalism leads to more freedom -- is certainly questionable. It hasn’t worked out that way in China. (At least, not so far.) Closer to home, many Canadians and Europeans believe that true economic freedom goes hand-in-hand with an activist government that promotes justice and equality through regulation of corporate excess.

Their sort of freedom would include the freedom to join a union -- free of the stifling US laws and regulations that make successful union organizing drives almost impossible. The article certainly uses "economic freedom" in a different way than Franklin Roosevelt would have.

The authors of the article probably oppose most government regulation of financial markets. But let’s not forget one of the primary causes of the US mortgage meltdown: lack of government regulation. So you may lose your house -- but you're free.

Canada and most European countries rate just below the US on the “economic freedom” scale mentioned in the article. These countries are free-market democracies. They just take some of the rough edges off capitalism with a larger social safety net, including health care for all.

Many people of all political stripes around the world think Americans simple-minded in seeing only the benefits of capitalism. They suspect that believers in unbridled capitalism are worshiping at the altar of a false God. For an extended counterpoint to the article, see http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/weekinreview/30goodman.html?ref=weekinreviewEqually

Which brings me back to a point I made a couple of weeks ago in another thread, but posted too late for most people to see.

Why do posters on these forums so often conflate liberalism, socialism, totalitarianism, and communism? These are all different things.The idea that socialism leads to totalitarianism is silly. So is the idea that socialism and democracy are incompatible.

Switzerland, New Zealand, and Australia are currently governed by parties that call themselves socialist and are members of the Socialist International. The same has been true in the past of the United Kingdom and Israel. None of these countries has ever been totalitarian. All have alternated regularly between democratic, socialist governments and democratic, non-socialist governments.

Many Americans are baffled by the concept of "democratic socialism." Maybe they should read the memoirs of the great Hungarian poet George Faludy "My Happy Days in Hell." Faludy was a social democrat who was persecuted for his beliefs by both the Nazis and the Communists. (In fact, it was the same interrogator both times; he'd just changed uniforms!)

Back to the present. More than 80% of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction.
But many Republicans think the only thing wrong with their party is that it is insufficiently conservative. There is a fundamental disconnect here that will probably result in a Democratic president. Canadian or European style government economic intervention are probably not on the horizon in the US.

But the US could be moving slightly to the left -- and slightly away from the some of the ideas in the article.

Just got home from the Level 1 cert at Camp Pendleton this weekend. Absolutely incredible!

Thanks to Col. Wilson and the Marines at Camp Pendleton for hosting the cert, and thanks to all you do. Chris, you in particular are an inspiration.

Thanks to Greg, Nicole, Greg, Adrian, Andy, and the rest of the trainers who helped re-enforce my humbleness. I have a LONG way to go!

Steve, Chriss, Blue, and all the rest of you: it was great talking to you and working out with you. I hope to have a chance to spill sweat together again soon!

All of you: I hope to have my affiliate set up by mid-February. Contact me if you're in the Denver area and we'll hit a WOD!

Ian,

Economic freedom is "indispensible". Do not confuse Saudi Arabia's economic largess with economic success/freedom.
Economic freedom at it’s most basic is the rule of law and property rights.
There are some states that have economic freedom but not political freedom and all of those are expanding their political freedom (except Hong Kong)
I believe the states that you characterize with political freedom but little economic freedom really suffer from a political free for all not freedom.

“There is also a directional issue. Does economic freedom lead to political freedom? Or vice versa? There are plenty of political scientists who fall in both camps.”

There are plenty of political scientists who are free to be wrong. Economic freedom leads to political freedom because of the flow of money.

Taiwan had incredible economic freedom (rule of law/property rights) and almost no political freedom (martial law until the mid 80’s and suffered freedom of speech issues until late 90’s). But the economic freedom that Taiwan allowed created the conditions for eventual political freedom.

Fat Slice,

The MOTO is your final question. The article in my opinion was a marketing piece for freedom as the means to create the MOTO "chicken in every pot."

Great video, especially the information about CF ing with nipple rings! Priceless

Previous comment being held by spam filter.

BTW, Milton Friedman's grandson is a crossfitter.

#23 Daniel, you only make about 7 major mistakes. Let's start simple and chronological: China.

Exactly what is China's history of capitalism, and on what time scale would you demand this capitalism to lead to greater political freedom IFF the article's idea is correct? (that economic freedom is indispensable to political freedom.) "Capitalism" in China began peeking timidly out (via necessity and corruption) circa 1995-1998. How quickly do you expect political freedom to be revolutionized? And exactly which measures of freedom do you think have worsened in China? Are you arguing China has moved closer to its Great Freedom of the 1960s?

(Yeah, its Great Freedoms were exactly the kind of "Freedoms" that muddle-headed statists like yourself and FDR champion. Freedom to call slavery 'liberty'. Freedom to enjoy the spoils of dividing up your neighbor's garage gym, after 'democratically' deciding with others that you can't enjoy happiness and fitness until the whole neighborhood 'shares' the 'means of fitness'.)

That gets us to #2: your definition of freedom, which may in fact match FD Roosevelt's. If you will simply say it, I'll be vindicated. So tell us --- what do you consider economic freedom?

You're going to tell us that 'freedom' means a person must enjoy the products of other people's labor without paying for it, that without these basic means he can't truly be free. And you, and your enlightened brethren, are the ones smart enough to 'reallocate' that wealth -- without paying for it -- and using coercion to do so. Sorry, you say, a few eggs must be broken for all of us to be 'truly free'.

What is your definition of freedom?

Mine? Freedom is freedom from coercion, freedom from force. Freedom means interacting with other consenting adults according to our unregulated, uncoerced judgment, and without force (take note, unions.)

This view of freedom and of capitalism actually rests on true egalitarianism: all people have exactly the same freedom. And no person (including the smarter Daniel Freedmans and FDRs) has the right to tell any entrepreneur how to do his business as long as that entrepreneur doesn't violate the rights of others.

#3: it was government regulation that led to EVERY instance of financial market meltdown, including our present asset bubbles and credit crisis. Where shall we start? Silver crisis of 1895? The Great Depression? 1970s inflation and government f&#(up in response to OPEC? Japan's malinvestment and MIDI-regulation that led to the 97 asian crisis?

Not that you can muddle up the argument showing how the government can better manage financial markets than free, profit-motivated individuals and firms can. Because you don't understand the basics of financial markets, how miraculously well they anticipate shortages, allocate money away from failed uses and to the uses that satisfy the most people, promote new discoveries and best practices, and punish sloth, ignorance and failure to help others.

Let's go, man. All of your piss-poor whinings have been answered vigorously, and you've met someone who knows both sides. I can probably articulate those answers and find the best sources where they've been answered. I also know the sources of your shite ideas -- I mean, the original sources, besides the maudlin, dimwitted editorials of the 20th century from which you've probably supped -- I'm not sure which source you got it from. Statists have historically been sophisticated, or simply children who can't get to TANSTAAFL. Since we all start as the latter.

One of the things I love most about CrossFit is how it breeds trainers into entrepreneurs, and in the process, they get educated about what responsibility is and how difficult it is. Meanwhile, we have a robust community sharing the knowledge of how to do it right -- completely free and unregulated, and thus dynamic and rapidly evolving.

Maybe someday you can develop a bureaucracy and government agency to stop all this chaos, properly regulate it, and 'protect' -- for example -- trainers from competition and the 'disruption' of changing techniques. Where's our job security, after all?

Very soon, people in the fitness industry will be using the name CrossFit -- or other aspects of our language like MetCon, intensity, etc -- to describe, for example, NEW and IMPROVED preacher-curl-machines that are CROSSFIT COMPATIBLE. And their salesmen will say, "I happen to be a firm believer in CrossFit." Just as you are a believer in capitalism.

That was for you sevan

WILL BE DOING YESTERDAYS WOD SINCE I MISSED IT AND NEED TO CATCH UP.

so me and my buddy Dave did "Murph" for PT this morning. It was my first time attempting this Crossfit Hero work out, and I did it in 40:43 with my IBA on. About 20 minutes faster than expected. It's a real good, not "3 Bars of Death" good, but still a really good workout.

CROSSFIT EAST COAST GAMES OFFICIAL DATE...

Hey everybody! CF ECG will officially be on MAY 31st, 2008 at ALBANY CROSSFIT, in Albany NY! This is not a qualifier, however, if enough people are involved there will be money given to the winners to help pay for competeing in CF GAMES in Cali!

For those of you that have not had the pleasure of visiting this facility, and meeting it's members, owner and trainers, let me tell you , it is a wonderful and unforgetable experience! For those of you that have, then you know EXACTLY what I am talking about!

FOR THOSE OF YOU TRAVELLING UP THE EAST COAST TO ALBANY..........

I am going to plan a number of check points along the way, from Virginia to ALbany, to meet up with other CFer's and caravan up to Albany! Come rolling into the city, 15 cars in line...ALL CROSSFITTAZOIDS gnawing at the bit to compete, but loving the feeling of comradery right from the drive up, to the wishing well at the end of it all! Also, I am going to plan a WOD, toward the NY side of our trip up there, outside, at some check point with a veiw, and stop to get our struggle on together that will be a great "prelude to a kiss" as well as stretch our tightened android bodies from the trip! THIS IS GOING TO BE A BLAST! And of course, this will be video taped as will the check points, and so on! It really is all going to be a great time!

JASON ACKERMAN, owner of ALBANY CROSSFIT will need to get a head count! Please email him at jay@bodybyjay.com, and if you have any questions with regards to the detail of CF ECG, please send them to him!

Intrest in the caravan up...email me via myspace, or at justntriquet@yahoo.com! I'll be riding the back side of the promotion of this like frickin zoro on the boards, so more posts to come!

Would LOVE to see a huge HUGE turn out!

hey, will I get big doing crossfit? i just gained a pound.

tee hee.

Great Video! Liked the short but detailed explantion of the TGU and the windmill!

Trainer comment of the day...

"Yeah, okay so that's not it"

LMAO! Good stuff! Liked the tour videos in the affialiate blog! Watched those the other day! Great facility!

crossfit pounds ggggooooooodddddddd....

jackassery pounds bbbbbaaaaaaaadddddddd....

(nothin but love!)

J roCK-
Good Luck! Should be a fun time.

Kate

One problem with so many WOD's in one day from different Crossfit gyms. Sometimes I feel like doing 5 different WOD's from as many different sites in one day. Must seek therapy soon.

Another restless rest day. Hi Bo

Hey, Dutch... So I didn't catch the full story. Are you and Pat doing a WOD challenge?

-Jeff

#37 Thanks Kate! UR not going??

#38 Must seek therapy? Brother, you are exactly where you are supposed to be, and this IS the therapy you have been seeking! LOL! True that?

i think i'll do a one rep for as long as possible of underside eyelid stares

J roCK-
No, I won't be able to make it. We are putting on an all day Benefit Festival/ concert with motorcycle show on May 31st. I will be busy with many, many things from about 5 am until midnight that day, so no time for a road trip!

Kate

Off topic, but does anyone have any good water PTs that involve CF concepts? I saw the pic of the guys at Coronado training and it got me very interested.

Missed out on yesterday, but decided to freeform it today... good hour of pain, for sure!

27/m/6'2"/190

3 rounds for total time

150x pushups
50x dips
50x pullups
15x 95lb. overhead squats

almost dropped the bar on myself in the last OHS set... wobbling all over the place, hah!

57:32 followed by a good 10 minutes on the ground

A NAME CHANGE HAS OCCURED.....

THE MAY 31ST VOMITORIUM EXTRAVAGANZA IS CALLED,

THE CROSSFIT EAST COAST CHALLENGE!

I appologize for the initial misquote of the name. CROSSFIT EAST COAST CHALLENGE!!

#44 S. Baer

We had a good pool workout when I was back in the states:

In a 50m pool, do 800m total distance for total time. Every time you reach the deep end, do 10x pullups from the steps of the high dive; Every time you reach the shallow end, do 25x pushups.

Usually followed that with increasing rounds of breath holds (30, 40, 50, 60, etc) until no one could continue.

Awesome for increasing your lung capacity.

#29, Kirez

Believe it, or not I AM a capitalist. I just don't share the view that the market is always and everywhere "miraculous." There is such a thing as market excess, just as there is such a thing as regulatory excess.

For an example of how things can get out of whack, see the Page 1 Wall Street Journal article from January 1, 2008. It's about the mortgage mess and how lobbying by the subprime industry "shot down
efforts to curtail risky lending" by government regulators. It ends with a lobbyist blaming the Fed for lack of regulation!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119906606162358773.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular

For more on "Why America Needs A Little Less Laisser Faire", see a Financial Times article by the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee ,Barney Frank at
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d001b2c6-c20a-11dc-8fba-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1

Here are excerpts:
"As we prepare for this autumn’s election, the results are in on America’s 30-year experiment with radical economic deregulation. Income inequality has risen to levels not seen since the 1920s and the collapse of the unregulated portion of the mortgage and secondary markets threatens the health of the overall economy.,,
...(The subprime lending crisis) makes it clear that a mature capitalist economy is as likely to suffer from too little regulation as from too much....

"...Conservatives have long argued that government efforts to address (income inequality) would damage the economy. They are, of course, the same people who predicted that there would be an economic disaster after Bill Clinton and the Democratic Congress raised marginal tax rates in 1993, and who opposed other tax increases on upper-income people. Economic growth in the ensuing years was among the strongest in the postwar era. It is now clear that growth in the private sector is consistent with a far greater variation in many aspects of public policy – including taxation and regulation – than conservatives claim. In fact, appropriate intervention with respect to prudential market regulation is necessary to promote growth, and its absence – as we have learned – can retard it....

"...In response to the current crisis, it appears that the regulatory tide may, at long last, be turning. In 1994 a Democratic Congress – the last before the Republican takeover marked the arrival of the deregulators – passed the homeowners equity protection act, giving the Federal Reserve the power to regulate all home mortgage loans. The avatar of deregulation, Alan Greenspan, then Fed chairman, flatly refused to use any of that authority.In contrast, today’s Fed will soon issue rules using that authority."

I'm not sure if Barney Frank still describes himself as a socialist, but the common sense view expressed in that article are pretty mainstream these days.

My own definition of economic freedom would be the current system in the US. I'd just make a few tweaks
on things like financial services industry regulation, the minimum wage and labor laws. And China could do with a little more regulation as well -- it might prevent counterfeit drugs and poison toys that endanger lives.

Redistributing wealth? Every government does it.
The only questions are whose wealth and how much.

#20, Ian, writes,

"The use of 'indispensible' creates all sorts of problems. By making economic freedoms and 'indispensible' means, it suggests that there always must be economic freedom in order for there to be political freedom. However, there are plenty of states that have economic freedom but little political freedom, and have done so over a long period of time (the Middle Eastern oil states come to mind)"

In this context "indispensable" means necessary but not sufficient. For example, the Zone diet is indispensable to optimal CrossFit performance. This statement is not rebutted by pointing out that there are people on the Zone who are not top CrossFitters. This is a matter of basic logic.

I think #23, Kirez and #27, Jakers, effectively address the rest of the issues.

Liked the video --looks like a great workout. However, do you alternate sides for the TGUWM, so round 1 would be on the right and round 2 on the left --that would make sense to me. Or would you alternate within rounds ie: 1 right, 1 left = 6 on each side.

#19 houston

do my eyes deceive me or did you write "bi's and tri's?" if life's journey has brought you to this site then there's no longer a need to workout like that. dive all the way in man.

My abs are killing me from the L pull-ups yesterday.

I don't know if anyone else has seen the previews, but Stew Smith is going to be on a new National Geographic show called fight science. It's airing on the 27th at 9 p.m. eastern time. I have used a lot of information from his site, and I think it will be exciting to see an ex SEAL in action.

M/28/185/6'0"

As Rx'd - resting.

Great video guys. Cill you look fantastic, we miss you. Come see us in Ann Arbor if you can handle the cold, haha. Andy, you have the best laugh, it's so contageous!
-Miki

M/22/6'1"/185

No rest for me today.
500m row
90 pullups
500m row
80 pushups
500m row
70 KB Swings (45)
500m row
60 KB Clean to Thrusters (45, 30 each)
500m row
50 Air Squats
500m row
50 Air Squats
500m row
60 KB Clean to Thrusters
500m row
70 KB Swings
500m row
80 pushups
500m row
90 pullups
500m row

1:13:52 -- Keeping the intensity level that high for that long is a real mind f@*k.
The rows were the worst, the last one was split at 1:47

Comment #23 - Posted by kirez - bravo and thanks. Paul

Comment #25 - Posted by Daniel Freedman

"Their sort of freedom would include the freedom to join a union -- free of the stifling US laws and regulations that make successful union organizing drives almost impossible. The article certainly uses "economic freedom" in a different way than Franklin Roosevelt would have."

Dude, these are fighting words. Unions as they exist in the US are devoid of freedom - they are in fact a federal govt authorized monopoly on labor and are anti-freedom. A real, free union, would in fact be as good as any other free transaction.

FDR, clearly, was a socialist, and therefore devalued free transactions amongst free men.

Given that you cannot even recognize that the current US practice of "unions" has little or nothing to do with freedom, your entire post is suspect. Of course, after your opening sentence it was suspect to me anyway, I knew you would be saying silly stuff after that.

The real issue with "unions" as they are practiced today is what they do to the workers, inside and out of them. My experience there's no group that is more miserable than the union folk, and they rate no sympathy since they are the cause of most of their own suffering by allowing themselves to develop an entitlement mentality.

The victims of unions are those brave folks who would do the same job for less money, or a lower skilled job which the union prices them out of, who can't be employed because of the union (federal govt enforced) monopoly on labor with the employer.

"Canadian or European style government economic intervention are probably not on the horizon in the US."

Most of what you say is underinformed, from my humble as ever perspective, but I pray you are correct about this last.

My best wishes for your crossfitting and a blossoming love of liberty, Paul

Daniel,

“Faludy was a social democrat who was persecuted for his beliefs by both the Nazis and the Communists.”

Can we please refer to the Nazis by their full name the National Socialists (Nationalsozialismus).

“Believe it, or not I AM a capitalist. I just don't share the view that the market is always and everywhere "miraculous." There is such a thing as market excess, just as there is such a thing as regulatory excess.”

I don’t believe it.
The market is not “miraculous” it is an “invisible” hand that moves through the market & what you are suggesting is the “dead” hand of government not the rule of law

Ah the old excess argument. Freedom will lead to that sort of thing. Spectacular failures and spectacular success. Both are wrong? We shouldn’t be free; we should be equal. Freedom means you do have the freedom to fail and I have the freedom to help you or merely revel in schadenfreude.

Barney Frank is a socialist and his article is populist jibberish. (Sorry if that is ad hominem I don’t have the time to detail his foibles.) To quote
“Income inequality has risen to levels not seen since the 1920s and the collapse of the unregulated portion of the mortgage and secondary markets threatens the health of the overall economy.”

To quote William Buckley in response:
“Back in the thirties we were told we must collectivize the nation because the people were so poor. Now we are told we must collectivize the nation because the people are so rich.”

Doesn’t matter what the problem is the answer is always socialism.

I’m a little short on pull-ups this month. Can I confiscate… er I mean redistribute some from Greg?

Only economic freedom creates economic success. The problem is socialism is socialism. The problem with capitalism is it’s success.

"More than 80% of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction."

I love this quote. I think our nation is headed in the wrong direction due to the inexorable march of more govt regulation year after year, the increasing power of fed, state and local govts to take our life energy (taxes) and property, and the massive taxation that will be required to stop Medicare from coming apart at the seams. Regrettably, I don't think enough of the 80% agree with me, thus, I fear we cannot stop it.

Jakers, well said, thanks.

Daniel is one of those 'interesting' persons who trusts to coercive direction of transactions between free men, vice free transactions between free men. One who, noting that freedom does not cure all ills or make life pain free would then give up liberty for tyranny - in as you say, every increasing doses.

Mortgage industry - if you have on socialist colored glasses, you see the need for more govt intervention, as with every other problem. If you love liberty enough to face it, you see the mortgage blurb of today as another bump in the road which may destroy some teeny, tiny fragment of the wealth which liberty creates via mutually agreeable transactions amongst free people who must live with the consequences of their choices.

I guarantee that the 'mortgage industry crisis' has not and will not destroy even a fraction as much wealth as our socialist systems (medicare, social security leading the way) do annually. The problem being we've accepted the destruction of wealth from these programs - we don't even 'see' it any longer. The mortgage issue is a bump in the road by comparison.

Paul

Paul

"Liked the video --looks like a great workout. However, do you alternate sides for the TGUWM, so round 1 would be on the right and round 2 on the left --that would make sense to me. Or would you alternate within rounds ie: 1 right, 1 left = 6 on each side."

i was wondering the same thing....anybody got an answer?

Daniel Freedman wrote:
"But let’s not forget one of the primary causes of the US mortgage meltdown: lack of government regulation. So you may lose your house -- but you're free."

What about personal responsibility?

The primary cause of the mortgage meltdown was people being greedy and either making or accepting loans they shouldn't have.

Is the answer to have gov't step in and tell us what to do?

Or should people be more responsible and think about potential consequences before they act... like what if they can't turn their house over in a few years at a profit, or whether or not they can afford a balloon payment or interest rate increase.

Awesome video!

The relationship of economic freedom and human rights is less a case of "If A then B"...one thing leading to another. It is more a situation of either mutual inclusion or exclusion. You have'm or you don't. This is true for large or small urban centers on up to nations.

If people feel safe conducting business(race, gender, etc), if the government does not make starting and doing business difficult or impossible, we have a setting in which human creativity and drive creates stable thriving societies.

I loved the WOD vid.....Does anyone know what song was in the background?

Day behind. WOD from ystd, details there.
8 Rounds even.

I'm in for the East Coast CF Games! Let's get a strong VA representation going up.

4 months...

The song is called The Queen and I and its by Gym Class heroes

Last night my son, age 12- comes downstairs and says he needs me to take him through a workout. He is wearing baggy jeans, and hard shoes. I tell him the workout may involve some running...he shrugs and tells me that this is no problem, that if were to be chased down the street he would not have time to change into "gym clothes". Touche' son. I have him perform a workout he had done 3 months prior...400M run, 21 ball slams, 12 BP's. In October he did it in 11:01 using a 5lb ball and a 30lb barbell. Tonight he did the workout in 10:38 using a 6lb ball and a 40lb barbell and basically doing it in dress clothes...CrossFit prepares you.

Apolloswabbie, well said. Daniel Freedman,how exactly can one be a capitalist and believe that the govt. should regulate the markets? Regulation = control. My handy(yes, an actual book) Webster's collegiate dictionary defines socialism as:
1. Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.
2a. A system of society or group living in which there is NO private property.
2b. A system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and CONTROLLED by the state.
3. A stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and COMMUNISM and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.
Capitalism:
An economic system characterized by PRIVATE or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by PRIVATE decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a FREE market.
You really can't have it both ways, either you believe in free markets or you don't. Just my 2 cents.

M/22/6'1"/185

Today I didn't rest, stupid, it's been a couple hours since I tired this and I'm just getting over that nauseus feeling.

Row 500m
90 Pullups
Row
80 Pushups
Row
70 KB Swings (45)
Row
60 KB Clean to Thrusters (45, 30 each)
Row
50 Air squats
Row
50 Air Squats
Row
60 KB Clean to Thrusters
Row
70 KB Swings
Row
80 Pushups
Row
90 Pullups
Row

1:13:52 -- Ouch -- you read that right, one hour, thirteen minutes and fifty two seconds.
Keeping the intensity up is really tough for that long, for me at least
The trainers at the gym were really good to me today, they guarded the rower while I did pullups that are only available up the stairs. Props to them

#53....

that is too funny. A good negative eye lid rep is always in order!

Unfortunately, I have to catch up. I did to many eye lid reps this weekend and missed most of the WOD's.

I'm curious, I would like to go to the Cross Fit gym in Santa Monica to learn some of the more advanced moves, so I can do them on my own with proper form. How would I go about making that happen...I'm guessing the answer is, make a phone call...but i figured there might be someone from the gym on this website...

Have a good rest day peoples! But don't rest to much, you can do that when your dead....

crossfit east coast CHALLENGE

did yesterdays workout because the gym was closed yesterday due to MLK day.

9rnds and HSPU (improved by a round)

note: HSPU were self assisted using a smith machine (useful piece of equipment, that), and for some reason I thought that 10 L-PUs really meant 12 L-PUs (I'm an idiot). Needless to say the L sit turned into a static knee up hold as the rounds went by. I will try not to have a brain fart next time so that I can do the actual workout.

I don't seem to have the fire-in-the-gut I had this morning before I started work.

Liberalism was born in the 17th and 18th centuries following the economic progress unleashed by the industrial revolution.

Economic progress is *necessarily* a function of productivity; thus was it an immediate result of that period's novel productive innovations.

And liberalism followed suit. In detail, the governments of the day could not adjudicate all the new business cases and contract negotiations -- they had no such experience, and governments NEVER have the ability to innovate. They only steal from what the free market generates.

Thus was common law born -- from the needs of business and trade. Only later did government seize control of this area of the law and lay claim to it. Today, people naturally think that law is the province of government.

But it was in this new culture of common law that individual rights and political freedoms were voiced, then demanded; think Thomas Paine, David Hume, John Locke. Followed quickly by the rise of industry and trade in the new land (America) -- and it was this economic freedom which so empowered the libertarian principles of our founding fathers: government as a (dangerous) servant; every man a king; and yes, laissez nous faire!

BUT WHAT HAPPENED? How did liberalism, meaning freedom from government, become the 'liberalism' of the 20th century -- the encroachment, the severe arrogance, the depredation and destruction of government?

You're seeing it right here, folks. Liberalism was the heroic American tradition. And FDR rode in on its coattails, and simply changed the meaning of 'liberalism'. He called STATISM -- the very antithesis of liberty -- liberalism. The press of the 1920s and 1930s, America's socialist heyday, ushered in this perversion, this opposite new meaning of liberalism.

Thus did liberalism become the very opposite of liberalism. This perversion didn't take place in Europe; that's why the rest of the world still refers to free markets, economic freedom, as liberalism. They hold with the true meaning of the world.

We've known for some four decades at least, that the greatest danger to economic freedom is the ineptitude of people claiming to defend it --- but not understanding what they call themselves. That happened with liberalism; now we see it happening with 'capitalism'.

Just talk straight, for godssakes! If you advocate private, unregulated ownership of capital and the means of production -- you're a capitalist. If you are advocating regulation and control thereof by government, YOU ARE THE OPPOSITE.

Calling yourself a capitalist while advocating the opposite is the grossest dishonesty. You are perverting the meaning of words. The world is still, and perhaps always will be, filled with ignorance, with envy, with thieves, gangs, criminals and fanatical authoritarians who will praise you as a hero if you simply call yourself what you are: a socialist, a statist (an advocate of the legitimated power of the state). Get yourself a red t-shirt with the icon of a skeeving little murderer wearing a beret on it. Millions of clueless punks will welcome you as one of their own.

But don't call yourself a capitalist.

If we want to localize this discussion, we can discuss how it would work in the fitness industry. This, also, is a historical pattern: business owners want OTHERS to be regulated, but not themselves. Those businessmen call themselves capitalists, while advocating increased regulation --- only because the regulation would be of other businesses or other industries.

So, how do you feel about government regulation of the fitness industry? You talk the talk of a slave. You want to walk the walk?

bear complex
power clean, front squat, push press, back squat, push press

7 reps without putting bar down, rest between rounds

5 rounds

75, 85, 95, 105, 125 DNF

dropped the bar on the 3rd rep at 125

run 400 mtr
row 500

oops....run/ row was 4 rounds

EricBrandom, you have an... interesting... interpretation of Rest Day. WOW. 1:47 on your final 500m row? On your ELEVENTH row of 500m.

Natasha did performance benchmarks of knees-to-chest (15) today.

I told her we hadn't seen Martone do release moves with more than one kettlebell.

She said the typical Russian circus involves juggling of multiple kettlebells (three). Somehow I've never seen one of these circuses.

For the folks asking about the Turkish-get-up-mills -- if there's 12 a round, then it's 6 on the left, and 6 on the right. You can break it up however you want, as long as by the end of the 12, you've done half on each side.

Colin #71 - there is indeed someone from the gym on here! :) Shoot me an email at becca@petranekfitness.com when you get a chance!

Good grief! The soreness from yesterday is abundant for sure!!! Thank goodness for rest days.

I am extremely behind in my posts and so am back-tracking today to catch up.

I did (as hoped) get my first Chin up/Pull Up on Saturday. I was very pleased with myself and now look forward to continuing to improve by getting more and more consecutive P ups from now on! YAY.

Happy rest day everyone!

The problem with unregulated free markets is that they lead to negative externalities that can have significant consequences on the common good of society. This stems from the fact that some things that should have costs associated with them - such as dumping waste into a clean water supply - often have either no cost or are significantly under priced in a true free market. You need some sort of intervention to make sure that all parties in the market are not unfairly passing on the costs of their economic activities. Fortunately for us humans, we have developed an excellent means of intervening in society such that the public good is not compromised by selfish actions of individuals or groups - we call it "government". No society will function without good government, it's only a question of degree. The presumption that market deregulation leads directly to a greater degree of human rights seems somewhat silly in this context.

Personally, I would rather live in Toronto or Copenhagen than Miami or Chicago, because these countries value such things as clean air, universal health care, and stable mortgage markets above the unrealistic ideal of unregulated free markets. I do admit that this is a personal opinion, to each their own. But if I ever visit New Hampshire, I'm still wearing a seatbelt.

#70

DAMN... i want to yack just reading it...

i think i'm going to do something light, the michael workout sounds good.

thanks becca!

Completed yesterday's WOD today, posted results there. That was ouchie!

30/m/190

Practiced double unders today. 30 minutes total.

Could only do doubles separated by one or two singles. I'll get consecutive doubles eventually.

Had to do something today to make up for this past couple days of sloth.

Ran for 20 minutes, felt great. Back in the game. I think.

What kind of socks/shoes is that guy wearing?

Figured it out! 5 finger shoes! I am getting me some!

I want to point out that this article is far too broad to be of much use. Increasing political freedom leads to increased economic freedom, and thus wealth. Great. So, how do you rearrange institutions in politically repressive regimes so as to increase political freedom? How do you even convince them it's something worth doing? How do you reconcile transparency with culturally sanctioned corruption? How do you get accuarate macroeconomic/demographic data on a mostly rural population?

The IMF, etc. assume you can outline apriori rules that a nation ought to move towards, and once they get there SHABANG! Wealth! However, the nitty-gritty of transforming institutions is what's of interest here, not grand pronouncements from on high.

As long as money buys influence in government, and government influences the market,then the government will act in the interest of those with money. If you remove a government's influence over money then it should remove their ability act in behalf of those with money. If we end personal subsidy (welfare, medicaid etc.) we also need to abandon corporate subsidy (farm subsidy, oil subsidy, etc).

The problem with most conservatives that I hear is that they think any mention of corporate responsibilty makes you a liberal. They want their Ronald Regan "Trickle Down" economics. If you want government out, really get them out. Privatize everything but the military and the justice system.

To make the individual truly economically free, end the forced redistribution of his(or her) limited wealth to the coffers of the corporations. If a man is to be free to make mistakes and pay the consequences, so too should the corporations. Why should I pay some farm conglomerate not to farm, or worse, farm tobacco?

I always find these debates entertaining. The only thing missing is a few slightly to the left of center democrats calling the slightly to the right of center "fascists" in retaliation for being called "communists" or "socialists."

The argument that capitalism works for the US should not be argued. It has worked. Unfortunately, it has worked by shifting the burden to other countries and onto other people who do not reap the rewards. That is not a democrat or republican issue. On this topic, democrats and republicans are not even arguing because they are in such agreement on what is acceptable. The fact that either party is for free markets but also talking about tightening immigration laws is laughable. How can you have a free market where people are not able to move about freely? If my job gets sent overseas but I cannot easily go overseas to follow it, where is the freedom?
Furthermore, in many places people are "free" to work but in most cases the economic ladder only has 2 rungs. Employment or unemployment. While it is true that you have to have economic capacity to meet your base needs before you can worry about anything extra like policitics it is also important to note that the free market approach does not necessarily meet those needs for everybody.
Global businesses generally have a mandate to continue to increase profits. This mandate does not mean that those at the absolute bottom are going to benefit from a business prosperity.

This quote in the reading stood out to me because it strikes me as somehow inconsistant with the articles overall point.

Economic freedom is essentially about ensuring human rights. Strengthening and expanding it guarantees an individual's natural right to achieve his or her goals and then own the value of what they create.

If we give people the value for their work no capital is produced. If I sew up a shirt that is sold at 10 dollars, I cannot be paid 10 dollars unless nobody else is being paid along the way. Even if you pay everybody in the chain their exact value at the end you have a 10 dollar shirt that cost you 10 dollars to produce, so no profits. You have to either pay people less than their value or charge customers more than an object is valued at. If we are to assume there is more than 1 shirt maker and it is a free market, the cost has to be close to where the customer values the item. Therefore, you cannot pay the workers their exact value unless you are talking about a system that is not capitalist. But then, you are not really talking about a economic freedom in a western sense any more.

The alternative is to develop economic freedom in conjuction with human freedoms. Balancing economic growth for both the Upper, Middle and Lower class. The method to achieve this could vary from liberal economic models to commmunist ones and could theoretically occur under goverments that are authoritarian to libertarian. The point is to keep in mind that burdens are already spread out globally and across class but benefits are not necessarily so and then work from there.

I do not believe that Economic Freedom necessary leads to Personal Freedom and vice versa. I believe both have to be worked at independently.

sevenpoint4, you've got the point exactly. Congratulations!, and welcome to the club...

Apolloswabbie,

Not sure, but are you career military? If so you have guaranteed medical, cost of living increases, retirement, housing allowance, px privleges, vacation, protection from arbitrary reduction in rank (pay), etc. After retirement, you receive income in the form of an annuity with cost of living adjustments, paid medical, px privleges, etc.

That sounds a lot like what a collective bargaining agreement seeks to provide for union members. Try getting those kind of guaranteed benefits in the private sector. I was earning 14.00 an hour in 1977. I now earn 27.50, with medical insurance and retirement. This is the top of the earnings scale in the union I am in. People working non union jobs in this area are earning around 17.00 an hour with no benefits.

Take a look at what an automobile, or insurance, or a house, or groceries cost in 1977, then tell me how great blue collar workers are doing today.

On the downside unions do protect jobs for underperforming people, but as I recall there were a lot of those same types in career positions in the military when I was serving.

Tested out Squats today in school, 175x8

Fafa fresh, your post is based on the false premise of intrinsic value. Just because you sew a shirt for 10 dollars does not give it that value in the marketplace. Some people may like the shirt, and be willing to pay 50 dollars for it, while some may not be willing to buy it at all. The "value" of everything is subjective,that is what the free market is all about, you trade me something(a shirt) in exchange for something(money). If the market doesn't like your shirt, you either change or go out of business, but noone has a responsibility to buy your shirt at the price you set. That is true economic freedom for you and for the buyer. When you boil it down, it really is as simple as that.

get the latest published version of "Capitalism and Freedom" by Milton Friedman. He wrote many years later saying that he was wrong about economic success and freedom/democracy being intertwined. cites South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore. Takes a big man to admit he was wrong. Although Friedman was almost always right. Greatest economist of the 20th century.

Gym was running PT tests.

2min Push-up - 75
2min Crunch - 121
Max pull up(kipping not allowed) - 13
1.5 mile run 8:33

Disappointed in push and pull ups, will try again in 9 weeks!

Practices DB snatches after.

First, apologies to Barney Frank. He is not now -- nor has he ever been -- a socialist. In a moment of madness, I confused him with Bernie Saunders. But if you believe FDR was a socialist, I suppose many others qualify as well. In his biography, Conrad Black makes a convincing case that FDR was actually the
savior of capitalism.

On to unions. Apolloswabbie (#57) is entirely justified in deploring the "entitlement mentality" of many union members. I've experienced it first hand, and it wasn't pretty. The flip side is that every union victory in an organizing drive is proof of bad management. The union wouldn't have a prayer if the company respected its employees. Everyone should have the right to join a union. Everyone should also have the right NOT to join a union. It's called freedom. All I ask is a level playing field. But current US law uses the coercive power of the state to deny freedom....the freedom to organize. Companies typically call anti-union meetings, threaten plant closures and fire the workers most active in the organizing drive. And they get away with it.

On the mortgage mess, there is certainly something to be said for personal responsibility. But much of the problem stems from a lax regulatory regime. Does anyone but the most extreme libertarian suggest the government should get out of the business of inspecting meat or ensuring that radio station frequencies don't overlap? If that type of regulation is okay, why not SOME regulation of financial markets? Some of the mortgage lenders were crooks who operated with impunity. And it happened because the Fed failed in the duty to regulate handed to it by Congress. Should loan sharking be legal, too?

The larger issue here is how much regulation is enough -- and how much government is too much.
Reasonable people can certainly disagree.

But you can be a capitalist and still believe the correct amount of regulation is greater than zero.

That is not really what I was talking about. I am discussing the step after the value is decided. That value cannot be passed directly to the employee or no capital is created. At the business level you are right and we agree, I am talking about at the employee level. Unless you are suggesting everybody be business owners...
If we look at the employee level, where most people are and all the world's poor reside or potentially reside. How can we give a person the freedom to get the value for what he produces without violating the capitalist model that the article otherwise holds as valid?
It seems like a flaw in the logic of the article.

Comment #92 - Posted by davidorr

David,

There is a great irony in being a libertarian who serves at the pleasure of the President and earns his living from the taxation of the public. However, it's the only way I can serve; can't dictate that I be allowed to run my own retirement or medical - but I wish I could.

Not that I would defend the current status quo of how the US health care system works now, but I could do better out there than what I have now.

Lastly, the picture you paint of union life seems to work for you, and you should continue to do it if that is the best option available to you. I don't have an issue with a free man pursuing his best option. My issues with unions are clearly stated in the previous posts, and they still stand. The fact that your union job is doing well for you doesn't change my experience that union folk are the most unhappy people around - airline pilots being the case in point I have the most experience with, Boeing unions the 2nd most common example, and UAW's situation - bidding up their wages to the degree that they've put their company at risk as the airline folk did (ask them how secure union pensions are) - is a great example of what unions do to their workers.

There's often a perception that being against unions is being against workers - I don't see it that way. I see it as being for freedom, and I believe that freedom delivers the best outcome for workers (for example - presumably, there are people who may be almost as qualified as you, who would do the job for less than you or your peers, who won't be able to due to the necessity that fewer people be hired to the artificially high price of your labor). I don't have any faith that I can convince you of that in the time that I have to work with today. To be clear - I have nothing against a man who finds his best option is in the union, but in the whole (not your specific case) I believe workers (and the businesses that pay their salaries/benefits) would be better off if unions did not give a govt supported monopoly on labor (restricting freedom) to a select few for each company.

Paul

42yom / 147

Going to the Stars Hockey game tonight so thought I would Work Out today and rest my hangover tomorrow;

Decided to do the Navy Seal WorkOut as rx'd (Bad Idea)

Pyramid to 10 of:
95 lbs Hang Squat Cleans
Ring Push ups
Ring Dips

Do a 1:1 ratio for HSC, 1:2 ratio for push ups and dips.

Workout Description:
Do 1 HSC, 2 push ups, and 2 dips, followed by 2 HSC, 4 push ups and 4 dips, followed by 3 HSC, 6 push ups, and 6 dips, and so on up to 10 HSC, 20 push ups, and 20 dips, then come down back to the bottom 1 HSC, 2 push ups, and 2 dips.

Didn't realize this would end up being 100 HSC, 200 Ring Pushups, and 200 Ring Dips. Never thought I'd say this but the Cleans were the easiest part. If it was just going Up the pyramid or down it would have been ok but both was just brutal. My triceps are fried this was like doing JT on steroids.

Time: 49:46 ouch

Post Double Under Practice

*Go Stars*

What do people think of protein supplements, creatine and natural testosterone boosters?

Is needed or just a waste of money?

#89 - yes, well said, bravo. These two types of govt actions are the evil sides of the same govt coin.

#80/Reto - well put - would you be willing to accept that the debate centers around what is the minimum acceptable amount of govt which is required to protect rule of law and a system of one sort or another to address the negative eventualities you describe? Seems to me like the Founders originally had the right balance, but it was lost when FDR leveraged the chaos of: 1. An artificially protracted depression. 2. A world war. 3. The massive shift away from farms and to cities/industry, which raised an entirely new circumstance of workers too old to work who didn't have farms/family support in old age/infirmity.

Paul

Love the T-Shirt at the end of the video

"You can cry just don't be a baby" Crossfit

Tee hee hee

Have Fun, Train Hard,

Billy

John,

The only thing Milton was incorrect about with those countries was the timing. Hong Kong is the only one that has lost political freedoms due to their lease running out. South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore continue to make progress in political freedom.

Apolloswabie,

Thanks for the props. My first post. Don't be too hard on Daniel. If it weren't for him we wouldn't have anything to to talk about other than, "True dat."

David Orr,

Dunno about Apollos military status. Yes military personnel have wonderful benefits, better than most. People are free to join or not join. Many wonderful recruiters try to convince our youth of serving but the week to week paycheck kinda sucks.

Also are you free to work with out belonging to your union? If you are an above average producer can your company reward you? If you don't agree with your union's political contributions can you decline to make a contribution for it?

“these countries value such things as clean air, universal health care, and stable mortgage markets above the unrealistic ideal of unregulated free markets.”

You are also free to pay 4X the amount for energy, wait 9 months for a hospital visit if you have a hear attack and rent the rest of your life.

Sevenpoint4
“They want their Ronald Regan "Trickle Down" economics.”
Ronald Regan advocated “Supply Side” economics. His competitor & eventual running mate in the primary derisively called it “Trickle Down.” Before he admitted he didn't have that vision thingy.
And I think hand outs or “incentives” to corporations are equally wrong.

Fa Fa Fresh,

Yeah I’m surprised we haven’t been flamed yet either.
But come on really what does fascism have to do with advocating a libertarian free market. Fascism is about central control and authority. I don’t’ know how the right keeps getting painted with this it doesn’t fit. (Okay maybe the religious right.)
Capitalism has worked for the US and anywhere else it has been tried. Can you provide an example where capitalism has come up short?
Zimbabwe had a wonderful little developing country. First they did away with property rights (seize all the commercial farm land). The next victim was the rule of law (seize the presidency). Then you money becomes worthless (inflation not seen since Weimar) and the population tries to move next door.
Ireland has experienced the complete opposite, reduced regulation, reduced taxes, making foreign investment easier.
Being free to work is not quite the same thing as economic freedom in general.

Why should people at the bottom be required to benefit because the company has done well? Will they be required to chip in when the company does poorly? What if there is a cash call will they have to pony up?

“Economic freedom is essentially about ensuring human rights.”
Nope economic freedom is about getting more stuff. For me it may be my very own GHD, for Sanji in Sri Lanka in may be an Air Conditioner. Trying to take away my stuff is a human rights violation.

Scott MacArthur,

True dat.

Sevenpoint4
“They want their Ronald Regan "Trickle Down" economics.”
Ronald Regan advocated “Supply Side” economics. His competitor & eventual running mate in the primary derisively called it “Trickle Down.” Before he admitted he didn't have that vision thingy.
And I think hand outs or “incentives” to corporations are equally wrong.

Fa Fa Fresh,

Yeah I’m surprised we haven’t been flamed yet either.
But come on really what does fascism have to do with advocating a libertarian free market. Fascism is about central control and authority. I don’t’ know how the right keeps getting painted with this it doesn’t fit. (Okay maybe the religious right.)
Capitalism has worked for the US and anywhere else it has been tried. Can you provide an example where capitalism has come up short?
Zimbabwe had a wonderful little developing country. First they did away with property rights (seize all the commercial farm land). The next victim was the rule of law (seize the presidency). Then you money becomes worthless (inflation not seen since Weimar) and the population tries to move next door.
Ireland has experienced the complete opposite, reduced regulation, reduced taxes, making foreign investment easier.
Being free to work is not quite the same thing as economic freedom in general.

Why should people at the bottom be required to benefit because the company has done well? Will they be required to chip in when the company does poorly? What if there is a cash call will they have to pony up?

“Economic freedom is essentially about ensuring human rights.”
Nope economic freedom is about getting more stuff. For me it may be my very own GHD, for Sanji in Sri Lanka in may be an Air Conditioner. Trying to take away my stuff is a human rights violation.

Scott MacArthur,

True dat.

You know what I love on rest day discussions? The random shots from the Rajibs (#99) of the CF world. Nothing personal, Rajib, but there's one of these questions about every 3rd rest day and it always seems to come right in the middle of some deep philosophical debate and it just makes me bust a gut laughing.

Point: "Economic Freedom is essential to political freedom."
CPoint: "Some market regulation is necessary to avoid market and industry excesses and externalities."
Rajib: "Um, does anyone know where to get some good whey protein?"

Just kidding, brother. No hard feelings.

#100 Apolloswabbie
"would you be willing to accept that the debate centers around what is the minimum acceptable amount of govt which is required to protect rule of law and a system of one sort or another to address the negative eventualities you describe?"

Yep, that's exactly the debate. The article, while perhaps not stating so explicitly, certainly implies that what's needed for achieving greater political freedom in the world is less government regulation in free markets. I'm arguing that, while economic freedom is certainly neccessary in achieving many fundemental human rights, this same lax regulation in free markets can lead to fairly large negative effects in some human rights - such as environmental rights, class ineqality, among others.

In the US today, I think MORE regulation is needed to address some of these negative externalities. We're destroying our natural environment. We're putting impovrished people in positions where it's impossible for them to reach any moderate degree of wealth. Thus:

#102 - jakers
"Can you provide an example where capitalism has come up short?"

yep. the good ol' US of A.

#103, Dale Saran writes:

"Point: "Economic Freedom is essential to political freedom."
CPoint: "Some market regulation is necessary to avoid market and industry excesses and externalities."
Rajib: "Um, does anyone know where to get some good whey protein?"

LOL. This is priceless. Couldn't agree more. I have a long time personal and professional interest in virtual communities. I love the way CF breaks all the rules....and is still a tremendous success.

But I already know where to buy good whey protein. To hell with all this freedom crap. I'm more interested in the REALLY important stuff: finally mastering squat technique....once and for all!

And I'm getting psyched for my first KB class on Saturday with a CF certified trainer.

"Why should people at the bottom be required to benefit because the company has done well? Will they be required to chip in when the company does poorly? What if there is a cash call will they have to pony up?"

I have had the unfortunate experience of management calling a meeting of employees to let us know they were cutting our wages due to business downturns. It took several years to regain our previous wage. You could also look at how the airlines handled their money issues. They cut wages and took pension money away to cover their losses. On the other hand, I currently work in the gold mining industry. Gold is at an all time high, which is great for shareholders, but they still nickle and dime us at the negotiating table, seeking to cut benefits rather than share the gain. By the way, who do you think actually produces the gold? Could be the worker bees at the lower levels. The miners, mechanics, process techs, secretaries, sales reps, etc.

28m 145#

Broken Angie- 29:35
Guy-42:50

Fair Tax = Economic Freedom

#105

But you have never gone to work and had them say, "You owe us 60 hours of work and $2,000" Which is what ownership gets to do if there is a loss.

I think a couple of the airlines just need to go out of business. Capitalism is a destructive creation.

I thought Gaia produced all the gold. (I kid.)
And how did the miners, mechanics, process tech and secretaries jobs come to be. They were created by someone who took an incredible risk. Other than the miners and the sales reps I don't think anyone else in the company is exposed to much risk.

That is one of the quandaries of economics. What is the ratio between risk and return.
Have you mortgaged your house to make this business successful? If someone else hasn't should they enjoy the same level of return as you? Of as you put it should they be able to share the gain with out the risk?

Davidorr, thank you. I'm a union carpenter in the Chicago area, and while I wouldn't consider myself a "death before scab, union nazi" type, I freely admit that the union has been very good to me and my family. I was once one of those "brave folks", as Apolloswabbie put it, who worked nonunion. I was also starving, with no medical coverage or hope of ever retiring. As for a sense of entitlement that unions produce in some, I believe it exists everywhere, in every profession, union or not. While the union does guarantee you a rate of pay it does not guarantee you a job. It's up to you to prove your worth, and it's been my experience in the union that those "entitled" workers who don't carry their weight, don't stay employed for very long.

#102 Remember Enron? How about Tyco? Those employees ponied up plenty.

#108 I would agree with you when speaking about an indvidual or small group of individuals, engaged in starting a small business. I have done that myself. Very difficult indeed.

This does not apply to industry giants. GM, Standard Oil, Cemex, Barrick Gold, etc.

#110 caveat emptor

#111 How does it not apply to industry giants?
GM- Started out as one guy buying an auto manufacturer that had good technology but wasn't doing well financially.
Standard Oil- Started as a small company
Cemex- Started as a small company
Barrick Gold by it's own web site says it has transformed itself from a small heap-leach operation.

Industry giants are merely small companies that figured out how to do it better. Should they be penalized for their success?

Had to catch up on yesterday's...

Complete as many rounds as you can in twenty minutes of:
5 Handstand Push-ups
10 L Pull-ups
15 Steps, Walking Lunge

11 rounds exactly. I hate L Pull-ups. They just killed me.

#102
This conversation is about to get cut short as the day is almost done and these things rarely carry over into training days. But in short, Imperialism is a failure of capitalism. So just tick off the various acts of historic imperialism and 9 times out of 10 it is a problem of capitalism.

See the problem I have with the whole framework of the debate is that we are discussing X country and trying to figure out what is the best solution for X country withouth regard to how it affects countries y and z.

This is why I pointed out that you cannot have a free market and laws that restrict immigration. If there are borders that cannot be crossed by people as easily as capital can cross or business can cross then there is no free market. This leads to exploitation of the system by those who have the ability to do so, the businesses at the expense of those who are subject to the system, the workers.
This is not to say free markets are bad, it is to say that they do not currently exist. So we either have to relax the rules to allow for true free markets or we have to structure the rules to give us outcomes that have the greatest benefit for as many people as possible. I do not know many people jumping at the idea of borderless nations on either end of the political spectrum, so...

My original point still stands that human rights does not necessary come from economic freedom and vice versa, they both require work independently.

Here's a fun WOD to try out, I did it today- very poorly-in 11:55. Incline of 2.5 on treadmill.

400m run
15 OH squats, 135lb
400m run
15 Front squats, 135lb
400m run
15 Back squat, 135lb

I may have to try that one again in the spring when I'm back to my old Crossfit self.

congrats, aaucoin! that is so great, right on schedule, too? good for you! well done!

ck

has anyone else watched the NBC evening news tonight? is anyone else disturbed by them stating (so cavalierly, i might add) that diabetes can "cured by surgery"? they stated that 73 percent of the diabetes was "cured" after gastric bypass, while less than 13 percent was "cured" by traditional diet, exercise and prescription medicines. one doctor said something along the lines of "surgery works so much better in adults" as if teaching proper life choices was wrong since it took too long.

“It’s the best therapy for diabetes that we have today, and it’s very low risk,” said the study’s lead author, Dr. John Dixon of Monash University Medical School in Melbourne, Australia. and the article on MSNBC states later, "Gastric bypass is even more effective against diabetes, achieving remission in a matter of days or a month, said Dr. David Cummings."

this bothers me so badly... i have lost weight as an adult. i know other people here have as well. i know people who have had gastric bypass -- TEENAGERS even. and now, 6-7 years later they are getting fat again. shocking. because they weren't taught the lifestyle changes.

oh, i am so bothered. and you know what i am going to do tomorrow? get up and workout. eat my oatmeal and berries for breakfast and my salad for lunch. i am going to work hard.

but then again, that's why i am here...

ck

Treadmill Run
-Hill Interval level 2
-4Miles, 34:35
-429cal / 35%fat
-181max / 162avg

Playing catch-up today, did DL 1-1-1-1-1-1-1 today

WU: 135/10, 185/5, 225/3
WOD: 295, 315, 335, 375, 395 (PR), 405 (fail)
Cooldown: 315/3, 225/5, 135/10

395 felt good so I got greedy, should have topped off at 400 even.

I did the DL wod from Sunday today. Unfortunatley, I messed up my back. My form was off and the back was rounded. I'll need to take a few days off to heal.
I'll post the numbers on Jan. 20th posting.

Gaucoin- way to go! I'm jealous, and can't wait to tell you all that I did one!

Also, everyone, please go to crossfithel.com and check out the video on the home page- it's a sick display of pull-up, parralette awesomeness taking place on an urban playground in a locale unknown to me. It's awesome, check it out. I wish I had a pull up bar in my hotel room.

I think my post last night got trapped in the spam filter- so I'll reiterate.

Thanks to Colleen for hosting me and for the two workouts. I was very motivated as Colleen introduced me to CrossFit last spring. Also, I hope I represented HEL well enough to tempt Colleen into visiting sometime to join us for a WOD. Thanks again to Colleen and the CrossFit coaches, both here and at the Lab.

PS Check out that video on crossfithel.com!

UGH! Hour of killer spinning after catching up on 400m/overhead squats yesterday. Legs are smoked. Not looking forward to more sprints tomorrow.

Jakers, you are correct. I owe Daniel an apology, I defaulted to 'snide and smarmy', or worse, when I should have stuck with presenting my passionate advocacy for 'more freedom, better outcomes.'

Daniel Freedman, pls accept my apology. I respect your guts as a crossfitter, and your passion to post on rest days. My comments did not reflect that and diminished what should be a more disciplined exercise than the sloppy frustration with your beliefs that I presented.

I hope to see the day when you will in fact be as free from govt repression and intervention as your name implies.

Paul

#127, Apolloswabbie

Thanks, but no apology is really necessary. I'm used to mixing it up took no offense.

"but they still nickle and dime us at the negotiating table, seeking to cut benefits rather than share the gain."

Sounds like you as a free man should exercise your freedom and go find a better option so you don't have to waste your life away working for a company that does not appreciate what you do for it as evidenced by their propensity to 'nickel and dime' you.

Or, perhaps you should embrace the fact that someone else runs a business that provides a better option for you via employment than you can get from any other means. You have the freedom to choose either. Take it. Or don't.

If you wish to use your sense of 'entitlement to more' to justify government intervention against those who provide these options to you and others, see it for what it is - a desire to use the coercive force of govt to get for you from others what you can't or won't get for yourself by free, cooperative exchange with your fellow free men/women.

A man who embraces his freedom should not count on the coercive power of govt to get for himself, from others, what he cannot or will not get for himself. Any time that free man spends worrying about the owners of the business that feeds himself and his family 'not sharing' in the good times is life energy down the toilet.

Entitlement mentality - as pure as any other poison I have never experienced.

Paul

Daniel, didn't think you can't take a shot, you quite obviously can. Doubtless, I'll get a chance to ply to advocacy of liberty against you again the future and I look forward to it. Paul

An interesting debate that I think has more commonality than not. We're "nickle and diming" here, at the debate table. There is no utterly, true "free market", in either the USA or anywhere else. Period. The Sherman Antitrust Act is largely viewed (in legal and econ circles both, IMO) as one of the better pieces of legislation that does a lot of good for the consumer - who helps to drive this (mostly)free market economy. Monopolies are bad generally for the people who need the services/goods produced because they eliminate competition. But the Sherman is govt intervention, plain and simple. Additionally, I'm pretty sure our Constitution contemplates some regulation in Art I, Sec. 8 - I won't bore anyone with the details. You can look it up or just "trust me".

Corporations were also not unknown at the time of our Constitution - can anyone say "British East India Company"? Adam Smith was kind of popular at the time, too.

All that said, I think we're really picking nits about how much regulation we're willing to tolerate. There is no question that the govt seems to grow and grow and grow and find new areas to poke into in our lives all the time. And I'll bet if we're honest, we'll find that we accept it on those issues that we think are necessary and deplore it on those issues where we feel govt ought to leave us alone. And it's funny because conservatives & liberals are all over the map on this - conservatives say "less govt regulation" but they believe Bowers v. Hardwick (the Texas case saying homosexuality can be a crime) is "good law". They want less govt in your wallet, but more in your bedroom?

And libs take the opposing view with equal hypocrisy - no govt interference with the "pro-choice" decision of women (stay out of the bedroom, govt), but they want the govt to subsidize these "free choices". i.e. You and I should pay for it with our tax dollars. Hmmm...

None of it makes any sense or has any principled defense. (NB - I am not taking a position on either of these issues, by the way).

The article hardly gets into this kind of detail, but offers what I think is generally a valid point - economic liberty has a symbiotic relationship with other basic "human rights"/liberties and therefore ought to be a predicate, or simultaneous goal, for the establishment of a political system. Countries with economic liberty trend toward other political liberties.

The verdict is still out on China, but I think it would be awfully hard for Tianamen to happen again and the govt to stay in power for long. The internet will eventually force more economic liberties and reforms, I suspect, over time. It may take a generation for the hardliners holding power to die off, but the day is coming.

Dale

20 Pull-ups
50 Dips
50 Leaping Deep Squats w/55lbs
20 Pull-ups
50 Dips
50 Leaping Deep Squats w/55lbs
20 Pull-ups
50 Dips
50 Leaping Deep Squats w/55lbs
20 Pull-ups
30 Dips
30 Leaping Deep Squats w/55lbs
20 Deep Squats
20 Pull-ups
30 Dips

#132, Dale Saran

I agree with much of what you say. I'd add the Terry Schiavo case to the list of conservative hypocrisy. How the special bill passed by Congress to strip one man of legal rights could be described as conservative is beyond me. It was a classic case of using state power to enforce one version of morality. Thankfully, the courts declined to intervene (having already considered the case extensively.) More significantly, the law proved enormously unpopular and President Bush and his cohorts beat a hasty retreat. But I'll never forget the coverage in THE WEEKLY STANDARD and THE NATIONAL REVIEW. At the peak of the madness, both published issues devoted almost exclusively to the case -- with one hysterical article after another.

Of sodomy laws, Pierre Trudeau famously said: "the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation." That was back in the mid-60's. He was right then, and he's right now.

On China: I hope you're right, but I'm not sure. Many of the students who led the Tienanmen demonstrations are now millionaires -- and silent on human rights issues. Some were even lured back from overseas exile. The deal is: "You can get rich with our blessing, but even talking about democracy or questioning the authority of the Communist Party is strictly off limits."

Meanwhile, China remains one of the most unequal countries on earth...a godawful dictatorship. There is a tiny urban elite. And then there are hundreds of millions of peasants-turned-factory-workers who have almost no chance of moving up in the world. They are assigned to work 70 hours a week in newly constructed factories. They sleep eight or ten to room -- stacked up in bunks in dorms next to the factory. They march into the factories every morning, after first lining up in formation. Many see their families (including spouses!) only once a year. It's not such a great life, especially when it goes on forever.

Did the video workout. Tough one. I did 3 rounds with a good bit of heavy breathing in between rounds.
Awesome workout.

Overhead Squats 3-3-3-3-3

1. 115
2. 125
3. 135
4. 145
5. 160-failed

#24 VAS:

Not trying to rub it in, but I think you called this one wrong!

Steve

#130 Interesting that you would use the word entitlement in what is essentially a business negotiation. Whether I negotiate on my own or as part of a group, I am seeking the same outcome. The difference is the bargaining power of numbers. Of course I am free to go out and seek employment on my own. By the way, I have not used the union to find work for me in over 20 years. I am perfectly capable of doing that for myself. I chose to work union jobs because my medical is usually the best, (obtained through negotiation), as is my retirement.

I am confused about your repeated insuation of govt coercion regarding union negotiations. I work in Nevada, which is a right to work state. Less than 40% of the people working at my site are union members. We pay the dues and do the negotiating. The rest of the employees enjoy the benefit of the wages and benefits we negotiate without having to pay dues. They are also able to file a grievance and be represented by the union in cases of discrimination or unfair labor practices employed by the company.

adam smith railed against the corporation as it exists today, actually.

re: "fascism is about central control and authority."

i hear the Fed cut the interest rate by three-quarters of a point today.

and "national socialists" propped up their economy with free labor provided by concentration camps, not unlike today's practice of using prison labor -- the newest cherished capitalistic right.

the author of this article is a shameless cheerleader for a failed ideology. the US hasn't been a true capitalist state since FDR -- the original american fascist who decided to fund the high technology industry via military research. e.g. every successful DARPA project (the fruits of your tax dollars) is GIVEN to whichever corporation is being boarded by former whichever administration staffers. what's more, if this (textbook definition) form of fascism was ended, our economy would almost instantly collapse.

it ain't pretty, but it's true.

p.s. just because you predict someone will call you a fascist doesn't make it not true

Subbed 4 x 500m row

1:44/1:47/1:50/1:50

#139: so because we have an entity designed to reduce economic volatility we are fascist, and because the Germans used slave labor, and we use prison labor, it's all basically the same?

Do you think it's possible there might be something in there you overlooked?

What nation is your ideal? Who does it perfectly, so perfectly that they warrant the approval of someone as well informed and important as you?

I've always thought of perfection as unattainable. Teach me otherwise. You must be able to, or you wouln't say things which are otherwise nonsensical.

fascism isn't defined as "having an entity designed to reduce economic volatility" , it's a system wherein the people pay taxes to a corporate class who prop up the economy. some people like that -- it seems to work, right? but there's no sense in pretending that isn't how we live.

nazis called themselves socialists to take advantage of the drawing power of a popular movement -- much like today's democratic party. nazis weren't socialists, and Democrats aren't democrats. the implication is ideologically dishonest.

perfect nation? doesn't exist. never will. perfection is, indeed, unattainable. so instead of trying to dream one up, why not work on yourself instead (that seems like a crossfit tenet, anyway, right?)

i am neither well informed nor important. i just read the news and study history. and occasionally, the jingoistic garbage annoys me just enough to speak out against all this false prophecy organizations like the Heritage Foundation dump everywhere.

only very occasionally, tho'

I agree with almost everything except the comments in the conclusion. Just because it's true does it give "champions" the right to impose themselves on another country through the use of force to "liberate" its people? What a naive and ignorant belief.

Worked out with my class today and wanted to journal it here...Sorry to not join in on the interesting rest day subject matter.

W/U: Lots of burpees in sets of 10. Other miscellaneous cals.

WOD: "Helen" as rx'd with full duty belt on:
9:35 (8:44 is my pr minus the duty belt)

Take care everyone!

Dan
www.CrossFitStickers.com

Comment #138 - Posted by davidorr

Glad you asked. Your post was far more meaningful than mine - too friggin impatient to do any good.

Unions are related to coercion because they allow 51% of the present workers to set the terms the rest of the workers, or potential future workers, can use to enter into a work relationship with the employer. The means some workers get more wages benefits than they other wise might, primarily by giving them a govt sanctioned monopoloy on labor. That also prices other workers out of a chance to work at that place, even if they would be willing to do the job for less. This sort of arrangement is particularly injurious to the unskilled workers who cannot be productive enought to justify being hired at union wages - so they are not. The unions are backed by federal law - it is a federally created monopoly on labor. BTW - the customers for the business pay for the extra benefits which are given (over and above what the market rates would be for the same labor), until the ineffiency of the labor monopoly gets in the way of the company's competitiveness, when the whole thing often collapses anyway (ie Delta, United, and seemingly Ford, GM). My union friends at American wish they were flying for non-union Southwest where they would make more and not be a highly contentious workplace in which people spend enormous amounts of energy trying to make them feel entitled to more money an