Question About Selling Gold

Question sent in by “Ordell”

I got one question. There are gold buyers who purchase gold from the miners on the spot. They are paying for the gold at the current rate. So how do the buyers make any money? Are they counting on gold to go up? Making something with it and charging a premium?

The gold buyers charge an assay and refining fee per lot, then they return some percentage of the gold, typically 98% (they keep 2%), and 90% or no percent of the silver (they keep 10% to 100% depending on the buyer). The per lot fee is several hundred dollars, and pays for the overhead of melting and assaying the lot. If a buyer comes with less than some amount, like 10ozt or less, then the buyer typically will buy it outright, over the counter, for something like 60%, which is a better deal than paying the fees.

Here is a made up example of how it typically goes:

Deliver 100ozt clean and dry gold.
Fees are charged to account and are taken out of the first payout later. -$450
The gold is melted and assayed.
Melt loss: 10ozt of impurities, remaining weight 90ozt
Assay of that 90ozt: Gold 88% (79.2ozt), Silver 9% (8.1ozt), other 3%.
A “next day” sell order is placed by me, the next day’s London PM fix is used as the sale price, lets say this was $1200/ozt
Payout: Gold: @$1200/ozt, 98%: 79.2ozt*98%*$1200=$93,139.
Silver: @$20/ozt, 90%: $145.8
Fees: -$450
Check issued for $92,834 no sooner than two weeks after the gold was delivered by me to the gold buyer.

Some gold buyers do it differently. This example might be a bit low for us, since we get our gold very clean. It seems that the result is about 85% of the raw dry clean weight times the gold price.

Conservative Patriots Group Q&A

Questions below were sent to all candidates for 2014, by the Wasilla based Conservative Patriots Group. I am in no way affiliated with this group. I am glad they are helping their members and the general public be more involved and informed in the political process.

Andrew C. Lee
Candidate for Lt. Governor
Alaska Libertarian Party

1. Do you believe in the written Rule of Law as expressed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights by the founding fathers and reject the idea of a living Constitution? Please explain.

Yes. We are a society of laws. Laws must be obeyed and enforced; if they are not worthy of either, then they must be repealed. If people want a law to be changed, then they must go through one of the legal processes to change it. No selective enforcement, no living documents.

2. Do you believe that government is best when it governs least? Please explain.

Yes. Some people just aren’t happy unless they’re controlling what someone else is doing. As a Libertarian I am the opposite, I am most unhappy when I am in charge of controlling what someone else is doing. I don’t want to use government to force others to conform to my position. Governments must be limited only to governing those aspects of society that cannot be effectively governed at a more local level of government all the way down to an individual governing his or her own self. As Milton Friedman put it: “Libertarians want the smallest, least-intrusive government consistent with maximum freedom for each individual to follow his own ways, his own values, as long as he doesn’t interfere with anyone else doing the same.”

3. Do you believe in the individual’s right to life, liberty, and property? Please explain.

Yes. I believe each individual has natural rights, including life, liberty, and property. The Bill of Rights simply recognizes and legally protects these rights from interference by the Federal Government.

4. Do you believe in the sanctity of the individual from conception (Pro-Life)? Please explain.

Most of your members would probably say that I do not. I cannot fathom electing for an abortion. But I do not have a uterus, so I will never face that decision. But I cannot find a basis for government to interfere. I believe an individual’s body is their sovereign territory and government laws should not penetrate inside. At conception a new and distinct human life is created, this is scientific fact. This life, however, is not an individual. You cannot separate that life from the life giver without the new life perishing. I hope for a future where there is no demand for abortion, where new life is valued by all who could create it, where personal responsibility and respect are the norm.

5. Do you believe our freedoms and rights are God-given natural rights, not given by the government? Please explain.

Yes. I believe each individual has natural rights, nature itself is the origin of these rights; whether or not there is a God. Government derives it’s powers from the rights of the individual. We cannot empower the government to do anything that we as an individual cannot do. We recognize that if an individual cannot force another to give up their life or property, then the government cannot either. If it’s wrong for you to do it, then it’s more wrong for government to do it.

6. Do you have compassion for the poor but oppose policies, such as socialism, that encourage people to remain on public assistance? Please explain.

Yes. Tax dollars should only be used to provide the required essential services of government. Tax dollars should never be redistributed to individuals. I believe in charity. I believe in free will. I cannot justify using the force and violence of tax collection by any level of government to take from one person and give to another; that is not compassion, that is theft. I believe that compassion must be a personal choice. I believe that private charities, when unbound by excessive regulation, are the best avenue for helping those in need, and are the best arbiters for determining who the needy are and are not. I believe that social programs run by governments become self-perpetuating, bloated, inefficient, and damaging to the people they purport to be attempting to help.

7. Do you believe in a strong military and have a great respect for those who have put their lives in peril to protect freedom? Please explain.

Yes. A strong national military is a critical need for a nation, a well defined Constitutional duty of our Federal Government, and cannot feasibly be done at a lower level of government. A portion of individual citizens’ natural right to self defense can and should be invested into a collective power of national defense. Likewise we have a collective duty to not abuse this power nor to abuse or neglect those that wield it on our behalf.

8. Do you support HJR 1? Please explain.

No. I am completely opposed to using tax dollars to fund private organizations, or private vouchers. Taxes are a necessary way to fund government, and should only be used to fund necessary government functions. Local districts and individual schools should have more control over spending priorities and curriculum, and not be forced into national one-size-fits-all schemes. Taxes should (almost) never be used for the private benefit of individuals. So I oppose vouchers when funded through taxation. Taxation is force, putting a tax collector’s gun to someone’s head and saying “help pay for my child to go to a private school or you will go to jail” would violate my ethics. However, Alaska is an owner state. Royalty revenues from resource development belongs to all; we as a people can decide how to divide that money up. We can say we want equal shares to each, like we do with a portion of it now through the PFD. But just as easily we can have another fund that provides Education Fund Dividends to people who meet certain criteria, such as students of a certain age. Those people could then use that money toward whatever they want, including any school of their choice.

More thoughts on schools and education:
http://safonatt.com/public-schools/

9. What infrastructure development would you support and why (projects such as Knik Arm bridge, coal, hydro, road etc.)? Please include project(s) of your choice.

First things first. I oppose any unsustainable or deficit budget. We must first fund all things required by law, then we can discuss discretionary spending such as capital projects, which may be zero for several years until we recover from the past several years of excessive budgets. Maintenance on existing infrastructure would get priority, then development of new projects. I believe the State of Alaska should focus on empowering private enterprise to pursue the projects that it deems worthy. Empowerment of private sector takes very little State money, merely streamlining regulations and compliance burdens, providing prompt action on necessary regulation and enforcement, and fighting Federal overreach that places undue burden on progress.

10. Do you support SB 90? Please explain.

I am not well enough versed in this bill and the related issues to have a strong opinion on the specific language of the bill. In principle, we must keep all the promises that we have made, and stop making unsustainable promises that we will not be able to keep.

11. Please describe your top three legislative priorities.

1) Reduce the State’s gross overspending, bringing spending within levels that maintain or increase our savings plans (these plans are like retirement plans for TAPS, when that funding stream goes away; depleting them now will be devastating to Alaska within 8 years.)

2) Reduce and streamline the burden that regulations and laws impose on the people. This includes working to reduce laws and enforcement expenses for crimes against oneself (such as drug laws).

3) Fight Federal overreach, including nullification of excessive Federal laws, enforcement of the original Alaska Statehood compact (such as 90%/10% split for resources from federal land), drastically reduce federal oversight and law enforcement within the state (such as BLM and NPS).

12. Do you support SB 21 as originally voted by our elected officials? Please explain.

Sure. I voted on 1; I want Alaska to keep the new oil tax plan created by SB21. Every expert I value says the immediate difference in revenue between the old Palin ACES law and the new laws is slightly more or slightly less depending on markets. A majority of legislators were voted into office on a platform to pass this legislation; we owe it to those voters to see this through. The best way to increase revenue is by increasing production, or we will very shortly find ourselves with a frozen and shutdown oil pipeline.

13. Have you or will you take funds from public employee unions to help finance your campaign? Do you see any conflict of interest if you accept such funds? Please explain.

Absolutely. I’ll take as much money from anyone and everyone that is allowed by law. There is no conflict. Honest. Campaign contributions may be sent to “Andrew C Lee for Alaska” PO Box 1370, Nome, AK 99762

14. Would you support legislation that prohibited the state from withholding public employee union dues from an employee’s paycheck? Please explain.

Maybe. If the administrative costs for providing this service to the unions is significant, then the cost should be born by the private beneficiary and not paid for by public funds. If this cost is minimal, then I’m not going to exert a disproportionate amount of time to change the law. We have bigger things to deal with.

15. Do you support the legalization of marijuana? Please explain.

Yes. I’ve never tried that crap and I don’t have any interest in it. But I’m tired of our government and society wasting money and lives on that plant. Anti-drug laws keep illegal drug dealers in business.

Right now we have all these unlicensed pharmacists dispensing unregulated drugs in secret and shadow. Now the unlicensed and unregulated parts don’t bother me so much; it’s the secrets and shadows that cause the problems. Lets bring drugs all out into the open, so the consumer can be informed, so the sellers can have and build reputations for the quality of their products and service. That would solve most of the issues with drugs today; and the issues that decriminalization does not solve are already with us today and are being made worse by bad laws.

I hope no one misunderstands. I don’t think people should smoke pot, or anything else, but that is a very long way from thinking pot should be illegal or that my views against drug use is a justifiable use of force to collect tax dollars to arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate people for disagreeing with me.

16. Will you assist in reducing the budget, even if this means less money to your district for non-essential projects? Please explain.

Absolutely. TAPS won’t last forever, we are destroying our TAPS retirement accounts, we are increasing the infrastructure dependant on State funds. Unless we do everything legal to bring the budget under control, the consequences will be severe. The longer we delay in enacting fiscal sanity, the sooner and harsher the austerity measures will be. Right now it’s 8 years away. Another two budgets like we had the last two years and it will be much sooner. If we don’t act, this would force major austerity measures and state income taxes.

17. Why do you think you best represent your constituents?

I’m on the ballot and they aren’t. :) I’m just a regular person, I’ve lived a life much like theirs, I share many of the same concerns and hopes. I don’t say I’m the best person to represent them. I say that I hope I am good enough to represent them. Of course it helps that I am smarter and better looking than average.

18. Do you think Alaska has a sustainable budget? Please explain.

No. You cannot call depleting our State savings accounts and increasing spending faster than revenues “sustainable” by any definition within the realm of reality.

19. Do you support an increase in the minimum wage for Alaska? Please explain.

No. I do not think the government has any standing to interfere with private contracts such as wages. What we need to do is reduce the government imposed barriers to entry that would allow an individual to start their own business and compete. The only reasons people take low paying jobs are: they are not valuable enough to the business to command a higher wage, the low wage is more than they would otherwise make at another job or through self-employment, and/or they get other benefits such as training and education (like an internship) that the employee values.

Park Service is Wrong on Predator Control

Response to Sept 4, 2014 Alaska Dispatch News Article: “Park service moves to block predator control on federal land in Alaska

When will these meddling outsiders get it through their heads, in most of Alaska “hunting” does not mean going out in the woods with a couple buddies and a few cases of beer to shoot animals as something to do when there are no sports of TV. This is how people eat, its about survival. All you self-proclaimed “environmentalists” are so worried about carbon emissions, think about what it takes to farm raise beef, process, freeze, then fly by jet to the grocery stores here in remote Alaska; and compare that to sustainable local harvest of delicious and nutritious wildlife.

The National Parks Service controls an area of Alaska that is about the same size as Massachusetts,Vermont, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware, Rhode Island, Maryland, and West Virginia combined. If it was up to me, Alaska would completely take over ownership and management of all federal lands in the state except for military reservations and small areas around national monuments.

The locals know when there are too many predators. Local traditional knowledge, combined with modern tagging, tracking, and other assessment methods tell us how to manage wildlife to the maximum benefit of the people. And if locals decide that tourists looking at wolves is more important than eating moose, then the wolves will find their way to that area. If the locals want the helicopter gunships to come back and take care of the exploding wolf and bear populations, then let them. Predator control is not about sportsmanship, it’s about survival.

I trust local people to govern over their own lives, they are the most responsive to changing situations and needs, they are the ones that must live with the consequences.

Question About Ice Dredging

Question from “topdogintampa”

The Pomrenkes sound like they didn’t do so well over the winter season

Basically no one does well over the winter season. It’s twice as hard, takes twice as many man hours per nozzle hour, and the gold per hour is less than half as good as it is in the summer.

I did through the ice one year in 2011, it was horrible. There was us and one other gold mining operation on all of the Bering Sea. I lost money on that venture. Even if I didn’t have any capital costs, and with gold at $1700/ozt like it was then, I made less than minimum wage.

The Discovery production company wanted us to do it again in 2012 when they filmed the first season under the ice; and we would have if they paid enough and had given us enough warning so we could have staged our equipment differently, as it was our gear was under a 15 foot snowdrift.

My ice hut did end up on one season, the green shelter on skis that they portrayed as Zeke’s. That turned out to be about $12.50/hr for the guys working on it; and they were by far the most successful.

The only reason anyone does through the ice a second year is for the TV show, or they live in Nome year round and have nothing else to do. They would do better working as a checker at a grocery store.

Construction of my ice dredging hut

Construction of my ice dredging hut

Using 48" chainsaw to cut hole in the ice.

Using 48″ chainsaw to cut hole in the ice.

The main pieces of equipment. Mini-ex, tracked ATV, and my ice hut design.

The main pieces of equipment. Mini-ex, tracked ATV, and my ice hut design.

View from inside ice hut though tailings hole.

View from inside ice hut though tailings hole.

Ad Critique: Invest with West

Check out this very exciting opportunity someone posted on an angel investor website for an offshore Nome, Bering Sea Gold, mining operation:

Looking for investors in up and coming JR Mining company with claims in Nome Alaska, can see more details on Discovery Channels hit TV show “Bering Sea Gold”. Great returns, project potential is in the Billions. Can anyone help out? Seeking investors for Gold Mining Operation in the Bering Sea, off the coast of Nome, Alaska. My company is 1 of 30 that control the gold rights, where there is est. 10 Million ounces of reserves off shore. Finished up the sampling, and raising the money for our first heavy lift mining vessel. We know for a fact we can run 40-80 ounces a day, we will give all of our investors the collateral in the equipment, and 70% of the gold until payout, then 50% for the life of the mine and equipment. This vessel can produce enough gold per season to pay partners a 50% return on their investment for the next 20-30 years. Nome Alaska is home of the most successful gold rush in american history, and the price of gold finally met with the technology needed to extract the reserves offshore as low as 350 per ounce. This is a very unique position, and very low risk with the exit strategies we have already put together. Message me for details. #Gold Mining #Precious Metals #Joint Venture #PrivatePlacement #Gold #Commodities #AngelInvestment
West B.

Now here are some of the things wrong with this ad:

His estimate of gold reserves offshore is high, and that is before the BIMA pulled it’s 45,000 ozt out, and the fleet of suction and excavator dredges have worked the area over for 20 years. The high grade stuff is almost all gone.

Now there is a large amount of medium grade gold offshore Nome, but the larger an operation the weaker the grade is that you can count on. This is because the smaller a rig, say a 8″ to 10″ diver operated suction dredge, will follow the narrow trails of gold much better and not waste time on the weaker stuff. For large operation, like the one I run, it’s not economical to skip over that weak ground, the cost determining grade and moving is too high. The grade we run is much lower, but the overall gold amount is higher.

I have dredged on the leases this company owns. Prior to the 2011 lease sale most of these new leases were held under lease from the 1999 lease sale or previous. The specific ones held by this company, I did not find enough gold on to keep my interest enough to bid very much on them. There are vast areas of leased and claimed ground around Nome that are very weak. Yes, there is gold everywhere, but a commercial operation needs to produce paying quantities. And counting on gold going to $10000 per ounce is not a sound business strategy.

It’s basic math that 70% of a small number is a small number. I’ve mentioned West Budreau’s operation in a few of my posts. Over $2,000,000 spent and over 2 seasons with large crews and they still have gotten less gold in total than I’ve done in a month with an 8″ I built for $60,000. As with anything, INVESTOR BEWARE!!!

The size of vessel and scale of operation that would be able to produce their 40 to 80 ounces per day estimate on their ground would be larger than the BIMA, and would cost a great deal more than $350 per ozt to operate.

So this is the third year of a “sampling operation” that is surprising. They don’t even have their second dredge in the water this year and I don’t think their main dredge has worked even 30 days yet this year. Their crew has never indicated that they were on a sampling mission. Last year they spent a large amount of what little dredging time they actually did on a lease owned by someone else.

People can always contact me for the inside scoop and background info on potential Nome deals. If you are someone with a large amount of money and interested more in having a great adventure than you are in reaping a large return on investment, I can also help you out with that, and help you avoid the bad schemes out there.

-Andrew C. Lee

PO Box1370, Nome, AK, 99762

Update Jul 23, 2014

Quick update: there are lots of dredges and accessories for sale, I see flyers and postings. I’m not sure how much of my 2009 advice still holds. Gold prices are much higher than then, but the smaller guys are getting fed up and leaving due to lack of production and better opportunities at home. This seems like more than normal, especially since there were so few new people to start with this spring.

By the time the port gets the new small docks installed on the west bank of the Snake, maybe next year, there may not be enough dredges left to fill them. Unless more big operations come in, or the 8″ and 10″ dredges that stay in the main harbor decide to park out there, away from the crowds. Well, I guess that is pretty likely, I think most of those guys would choose floating docks vs having to raft 3 deep on the walls. I think the residents of Belmont Point on the east bank will be glad to get the little dredges off “their” side.

Also, many dredges have still not got in the water this year. Blue Water Gold, aka Blue Water Mining, has not even put their $250k 8″ dredge/crew boat in the water yet. Their Trucks and ATVs are for sale. Their one $600k 10″ dredge is barely out of the harbor. I don’t think they have even gotten 40 ounces yet this year. I talked to the guys and they are trying to mine as much as they can, but they are inexperienced and not yet competent at running a professional gold mining operation. I wouldn’t be surprised if Blue Water Mining is ready to close up and liquidate everything, unless they can find another round of investors to finance their inefficient operation. They are not alone, most operations fail, few operations have as much investor money to delay their failure for so many years.

Drugs and Laws

YES on 2Vote Nov 4th, 2014

Right now we have all these unlicensed pharmacists dispensing unregulated drugs in secret and shadow. Now the unlicensed and unregulated parts don’t bother me so much; it’s the secrets and shadows that cause the problems. Lets bring drugs all out into the open, so the consumer can be informed, so the sellers can have and build reputations for the quality of their products and service. That would solve most of the issues with drugs today; and the issues that decriminalization does not solve are already with us today and are being made worse by bad laws.

I hope no one misunderstands. I don’t think people should smoke pot, or anything else, but that is a very long way from thinking pot should be illegal or that my views against drug use is a justifiable use of force to collect tax dollars to arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate people for disagreeing with me.

I don’t want to use government to force others to conform to my position.

Some people just aren’t happy unless they’re controlling what someone else is doing. As a Libertarian I am the opposite, I am most unhappy when I am in charge of controlling what someone else is doing.

Nome Update 7/15/2014

First big storm of the summer has hit Nome, expected to last a week, might be another storm right behind it.

Natural turbidity levels have been a problem for the divers for the past week, due I think to strong currents pulling up biomass from the bottom and murking out most people. Higher skilled dredgers have been able to use dive lights and “dredging by braille” to work.

A group of about six or seven long-time 6″ dredgers have called it quits. Fed up with the poor gold, the unwelcoming atmosphere of the local government, and they are just getting tired of it. They sold off their dredges, equipment, and cabins/accommodations.

There are several dredges of various sizes for sale, some that have not been in the water yet this year, some not last year either. Even the infamous Randy Horne is selling off his stuff; I guess his scheme of having 4 to 6 investors/partners on a 6″ dredge, that then has to hire divers, isn’t enough of a money maker anymore. (I’m hoping that is because he has run out of people to scam, because they have started wising up to people who make big promises and don’t deliver)

Several dredges have been doing well, these are mostly with seasoned crews. I am surprised that the 10″ NorPac is not in the water this year, other 10″ dredges of it’s fleet are working. This is the large dredge that lost power and grounded on the beach last year, bending a shaft and other damage.

I’ve been here 3 months and we have about 25 days of dredging in so far, which is pretty close to a record for us, and way more days than almost everyone else so far this year. We are much bigger, by far the largest suction dredge in the fleet, so we often get a more days than the smaller guys.

The harbor has finally removed the stupid stand-off bumpers that didn’t go low enough, thus pinning several boats under them every year during the fall low tides. Unfortunately they replaced them with these floating horizontal bumpers that don’t let the boats get close enough to the ladders. In what harbor in the world have you ever seen them put bumper stuff along the steel walls? Normally boats bring their own bumpers, right?

There are a few dredges still being constructed, big diggers. One has been under construction for a couple years, the other since early June. There is word that another smaller version similar to the rov-style dredge I work on will be back this summer, after a rebuild or two; maybe they will be here in August, they are having serious problems with their buy-back crab boat, and lack of money because they spend lots of time building and not enough time mining.

The two excavator barges that jack off the water have been getting the most time in, but they have huge costs with payroll and upkeep. I hope they succeed, they put a lot of hard work into their operation, but their cost per ozt has to be kept low enough to be profitable. I’ve seen plenty of operations where their cost per ozt has been over $10,000; when successful ones are much lower, below the price of gold of course, around $600 maybe. That’s about what it was for my 8″ dredge, which was really slim when gold was under $800.

I did the math on my old 6″ and 8″ operations, and asked around. Suction dredging is the greenest way to mine, with a burn rate of about 4 to 10 gallons per ozt recovered.

Good Luck

Free Cars for All My Employees

Lets say that I own a company and that I feel safe and reliable transportation for my employees is so important that I choose to give each employee a car. I’m paying for the car, so I get to decide what type of car they get and what features it has. This is a gift for being an employee, or in other words it is an employee benefit. A benefit is just a gift with strings attached.

Lets say an employee smokes and demands that the car I give him has a built in lighter and ashtray, or an employee drives in from out of town and demands that the car I give him has satellite internet. They can demand and I can refuse; this is called a free market. I can also fire, and get less whiny employees; this is called free market. They can quit and go try to find another employer that will give them the type of car they want; this is called free market.

How about I just want to give them a basic car, purely no frills transportation. No power steering, no power locks, no power windows. Even if 99% of cars have these. I’m upfront with my employees and prospective hires. If they choose to work for me they know what to expect, no secrets there. And if they want those features, they can pay to have them installed. I could even give them cars with no airbags or seat belts, personally I never would omit those features, but the point is I should be allowed to give or not give them whatever I want; it’s my gift.

Facts about how air bags and seat belts save lives and are important features to a safe car are not relevant; no one should be allowed to force me to pay for them if I don’t want. That is called freedom. It’s also called stupid, but that is the great thing about freedom, freedom allows stupidity. Freedom allows choice. Any attempt to remove or limit choice is an assault on freedom. Freedom is choice. Force is authoritarianism.

As a Libertarian I oppose the initiation of force. In the above example, no one is forcing me to give anyone a car, no one is forcing someone to take a car, no one is forcing the car to have certain features. The parties involved in that exchange can use their leverage and power to negotiate a situation more conducive to their desires without initiating force or violence. An outside party (or even a government) can look in on this private situation and baulk at one one side offers and what the other side agrees to, but it is never their place to interfere with free exchange between consenting adults.

If you see a situation that you don’t like and you want to use the force (violence) of government to fix it, ask first if a problem can be solved with more freedom instead of less. If less freedom, then stop, you are out of line.

Back to the car example. To improve the choices for the employer providing the free car to the employees and to improve the choices the employees have to customize the cars to suit their desires, there are several ways for the government to provide more freedom. Equalize tax burdens so a gift of a car and the gift of money equal to what the employer would spend on the car are taxed or not taxed the same. (Gasp, do we dare to remove a crony tax loophole!) Reduce regulations that drive up the cost of cars, yes government should be in charge of defining standards it’s listed right there in the US Constitution, and yes an appropriate level of regulation forcing car makers to reduce the harm their cars might do to people that do not opt in to a fully disclosed risk. But for the most part there are a lot of shenanigans from the mining of the raw materials to the buyer registering the final product that needlessly drive up the cost of a car.

 

Libertarians respond to Hobby Lobby ruling

Once again the Libertarian perspective is the most reasoned and most inline with the basic principles of freedom and liberty. Even for this red herring of an topic. Below is the official statement from the national Libertarian Party. -Andrew C. Lee

In response to yesterday’s Hobby Lobby ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court, Libertarian Party Executive Director Wes Benedict made the following statement:

It’s strange that liberals and conservatives are making this ruling out to be a huge deal. All the ruling does is remove a very narrow coverage requirement, in very specific cases; 99.9 percent of Obamacare is upheld.

It’s true that closely held corporate entities should not be forced to pay for this particular contraceptive coverage. But focusing on that narrow issue misses the bigger point: No employer should be forced to provide any health coverage at all.

This ruling just draws the line between freedom and regulation arbitrarily. If these employers are free to ignore this particular mandate, why aren’t other employers free to ignore other Obamacare regulations? They should be.

Obamacare is unjust and unconstitutional from top to bottom. No employer should be forced to provide health coverage to its employees, or penalized by government if it doesn’t…

Read More at www.lp.org/news/press-releases/libertarians-respond-to-hobby-lobby-ruling