"Chemical levels in children's blood tests higher..."

"...than unexposed peers"

That's the recent headline in the local news. Question to consider: who owns the water supply?

If bottles of, say, Poland Springs were contaminated, it is clear who is liable and who should pay damages. When "we" (i.e., the State) owns something, a few unimportant people get chopped, but certainly nothing goes out of business.

Also, if the USAF end up paying for any damages, it is really the hapless taxpayers who foots the bill.

Helicopters and drones

I've noticed several editorials in the local paper about the helicopter rides from Pease. I notice two general types. The first type is from someone who lives in the area who is complaining about the noise and how it makes his/her home less desirable. The second type is from someone telling the first type to shut up because the helicopters are obeying all the arbitrary ordinances and laws.

Just as with Exeter's spy drone, the problem can be solved easily with property rights. Who owns the air space? Who owns the noise level in one's home? Any violations would be considered trespass. Private property would rescue everyone, but instead nobody is happy except the people who benefit from the politically-determined laws, and even they only fleetingly because they are always in danger of the political winds shifting and the laws being changed to work against them.