But O the truth, the truth. The many eyes That look on it! The diverse things they see.
George Meredith
Don't Tell Me Words Don't Matter...
Learn Liberty Debate on Education
Horwitz is one of my favorite economists (in fact, I cited him in a recent FB Corner in a comment on the Federal Reserve), so it will not surprise familiar readers to know I think that he makes a better case than Reiman here. The idea that the economy exists for the benefit of the rich is ludicrous; the upper 1% don't live in middle-class houses or apartments, shop at the local supermarket, buy inexpensive imported cookware, clothing or shoes. I have now access to more information and research, at nominal or no cost, through the Internet than I could have ever dreamed while working on my bachelor's degree and doing work-study at the university library. This was not the result of some government initiative, anything comparable to JFK's moon mission. The very idea that we need government monopolists in control of the education market is absurd; education is just like any other market: it thrives on competition and innovation. Public education is hardly free; many families have to pay for their kids' education twice (if they attend private school). I have little doubt government meddling has vastly exacerbated sector inflationary cost pressures (I've frequently criticized the government college loan bubble). What have we seen in lower public education over the past 5 decades? We see a blurring with political ideology--multicultural nonsense, environmental or economic progressivism, nontraditional sexuality, etc., not robust math and communication...
Welcome to Barack Obama's Deadbeat Nation
Tyranny in the Senate
Facebook Corner
 |
| Via LFC |
(Bastiate Institute). When was the last time a government edict prohibiting a service or good actually kept people from buying and selling that service or good?
Let's see: occupational licensing, interstate restrictions on health insurance marketing, sale of home-baked products, FDA drug approvals and raw milk/product distribution, victimless crimes, etc. But I guess what you're really asking is, can the motivated buyer, willing to take on the risk of law enforcement, find workarounds in the underground economy? Yes. But I suspect Statist barriers to entry will suppress a number of potential suppliers whom want to sell in the official economy.
(In a LFC thread on a Jillette quote I've embedded in the past that argues with the concept of charity via government): Demarcates are more generous that rich Repukes!
To the "progressive troll": I'm not a partisan, but I can tell you that the well-to-do Republicans I know are far more generous than the hypocritical Democrats--it's not even close. I think Arthur C. Brooks has done research on this issue. I have a new twist on the saw "those who can't do, teach": "those who won't give, preach".
(Bastiat Institute had a discussion on today's historic Senate vote to change rules for filibusters on appointments and judicial nominations.)
It's the palpable hypocrisy of the hypocritical Left--I tried scanning the comments to see if anyone remembered the similar 2005 crisis when the Dems were in the minority--and enough GOP senators brokered a compromise to retain the minority privilege. The sad thing is that the Senate is so polarized under Obama, that essentially no Democrats offered to do the same this time around (given the party line vote). As the old saw goes, karma is a bitch. I don't want to hear the progressive trolls griping about "obstructionist" tactics: guess what happens when the majority refuses to compromise? Look at unprecedented party-line votes on ObamaCare. Now, personally, I don't mind reserving the filibuster to policy matters, but I would like to see relevant reforms, like judicial term limits and right to recall federal judges.
(Libertarian Republic has a piece on Obama's 10-year renewal on Afghanistan occupation).
Why not prop up corrupt regimes, waste American blood and treasure? This is the same demagogue whom had the judgment to come out against Iraq mission (when he didn't have a vote in the matter)....
(LFC). If you unions cause unemployment and reduce productivity according to economic theory, how do you explain Scandinavian countries like Sweden, Finland, and Denmark where 70-90% of the workforce is unionized yet they don't have high unemployment and have fairly strong economies?
Among the issues of unions in the US: crony legal protections and privileges, violations of the individual's right to work, undue interference in corporate decision making and their operation in the noncompetitive government workplace. But let's get more to the apples and oranges comparison of the "progressive troll": the assumption is that labor policies are the only relevant factor. As Swedish Mises contributor Markus B points out, the Nordic countries are freer than their European counterparts (less regulation--except for labor). They are also smaller countries with significant natural resources (scalability of results is questionable)--but more to the point, the Nordic countries have had to reform in response to various economic crises over the past 4 decades. By the way, the figures I've seen, as of 2000, are more like 50-85%.
A Libertarian Republic piece notes how terminology for ObamaCare has shifted with its unpopularity.
Don't tell me words don't matter. I've always called it the Democratic Party Healthcare Law, because only Democrats voted for it...
Musical Interlude: My Ipod Shuffle Series
Neil Young, "Heart of Gold". A deceptively simple, brilliantly arranged song that seems to grow more relevant the older I get. The highest tribute I can give to a singer-songwriter: I wish I had written that.
George W. Bush and a Matter of Character
I have a number of criticisms of Bush 43, but given Obama's deliberate misleading the American people over their healthcare, Bush's personal character shines in contrast to the defective people whom preceded and followed him.
The Truth About Fracturing
