Appreciation can make a day,
even change a life.
Your willingness to put it into words is all that is necessary.
Margaret Cousins
Amused by Blog Stats
Apparently I have attracted the attention of hostile "progressives" whom have found a way of trashing the blog through blog stats. (Good. That means that people are reading the blog and some don't like what I'm saying; as the old saw goes, any publicity is good publicity. Just a personal anecdote: I used to deliver newspapers in high school. One of my customers quit the paper, saying they weren't reading it, just using it to wrap the garbage, line the birdcage, whatever. You can't take criticisms personally; I'm a former professor--if you can't deal with petty criticisms from colleagues, students or journal reviewers, don't go into the profession.)
Clueless "Progressive" Image of the Day
 |
| Via LFC |
Pro-Liberty Thought of the Day
 |
| Courtesy of LFC on FB |
World Poverty Trends
Privatize It--Transportation Edition
I don't usually feature scholars from the Brookings Institution, widely regarded as center-left (and have been known to vote Democrat up to 97%) I came across Cliff Winston during a recent Econtalk on transportation. Winston is not a government apologist, making it clear that the private sector would be far more innovative and effective; he points out privatizations of airports, even air traffic controllers, done elsewhere, talks about insanity I've routinely encountered (e.g., red lights in the early morning with no opposing traffic--a point I made earlier in this post about the value of one's time in a queue). Roberts and Winston had a discussion of the history of transportation in the US--including private tollways. How did the government get involved? Winston suggests part of the story is government bailouts of failing private companies. In a rule-bound government bureaucracy, innovation is all but impossible. Winston talks about technology lag (say, going from radar to satellite technology) and poor accounting practices (e.g., factoring capital costs/improvements in pricing), market-based road usage fees, etc. I would be very supportive of the types of reform Winston discusses.
Facebook Corner
A progressive troll to LFC:
There is always resistance to change--many people are vested in the status quo and want to use force (government) to control innovators and free thinkers. In my interpretation, Rand is saying that the attempts of government and Luddites are ultimately futile.
LFC posed a photo mocking preexisting health mandatory coverage showing a wrecked car and asking whether auto insurers should also be forced to insure against preexisting conditions.
Of course, auto insurers write "real" insurance against liabilities for FUTURE event risks, i.e., damage your car does to other people and property (like one driver managed to damage my folks' house). There are various nuances such as whether the state is no-fault or whether you have to purchase optional coverage to cover injuries to yourself or your auto (if you're at fault). Obviously the photo is referring to buying accident coverage after the fact, which really amounts to socializing your existing liabilities, which is theft, pure and simple.
 |
| Via LFC |
No, no, never give a Keynesian credit. It will lead to an ego bubble...
(New comment). The last thing a recovery needs is the uncertainty caused by activist government or monetary policy. It is utterly absurd to reward the principal villains of recessions--the architects and enablers of failed public policy.
 |
| Courtesy of Time via Tom Woods |
Re. Simon's article (HT LFC) on advice for post-shutdown, pointing out that it's unlikely the ObamaCare business model will work, sort of a "be careful of what you wish for" message for Dems
The point is, the business model fails. No doubt that people whose prospective costs exceed premiums have every incentive to socialize their expenses; the point is that the government will be forced to make up the difference as we end up in a vicious circle of older/sicker people. What Simon doesn't address is what a lot of us have been speculating--that the Democrats knowingly created a system that would blow up--and then try to blame it on "market failure" to nationalize health care in a single-payer system, something Democrats have been plotting for since at least the FDR Administration
 |
| Via Statism is Slavery |
(group moderator) Please explain...
(Other commentator) it is. witness the government we have today. grown from minarchy.
Most minarchists (I include myself) argue for limited government (principally justice and common defense). Government is monopoly. Why socialist? My guess is they (probably left-libertarian) really mean 'intrinsically crony' they are anti big everything, including corporations. Note the fact they aren't saying 'libertarian'; they are qualifying the term. So this probably reflects a difference between left- and right (limited government) libertarianism. Obviously I disagree.
Political Humor
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of Henry Payne and Townhall |
Rockwell, "Somebody's Watching Me"
Cool Science
